
Class. 



O-^:^ 



Book_^.Jd_5:i 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT 






iflSB^ 






■or*'^ 






%Wed 



\osel Jf-/ I 1 



i4.< 









^ 









Vvtt' 



-^^ i;"? ' 









^? / 



tbiv '^^ 



v.. A 



.'"' 






\Bosnia 

'^•Serq/evcc 



BAQK| 












s\-E A 



f 






i-o 



MODERN EUROPE 



BY 



CHARLES DOWNER HAZEN 

PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 




NEW YORK 
HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 



i^. 



■ sO. 



Copyright, 1920, 

BY 

HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 



. MAR 24 1920 
©CU56G160 



PREFACE 

The present volume is, in large measure, a new edition of my 
Modern European History, altered, however, in important partic- 
ulars. Chapters on England in the Seventeenth Century, on France 
under Louis XIV and on the Industrial Revolution have been added, 
as well as one on the Conference of Paris and the present situation 
'"f the world. The book covers, therefore, approximately three 
enturies of European history and comes down to the close of the 
ear 1919. Numerous changes of detail have also been introduced 
1 the line of greater condensation or expansion of various topics, 
he small nations have been brought together into a single chapter 
A'ith a view to greater simplicity and effectiveness of treatment. 
The attempt has been made to keep constantly in mind the vital, 
continuing factors in the evolution of modern Europe, to show clearly 
how the present is the product of the past. 

America has come to realize how ignorant she has been of Euro- 
pean history and of European conditions and how heavily that 
ignorance has cost her. Not only her citizens but also her official 
leaders, high and low, have frequently revealed, during the appalling 
crises of the last five years, a lamentable and dangerous lack of 
comprehension of things vital to their own welfare and to the welfare 
of the world. As a nation we have successfully " muddled through " 
the great entanglement of our times, but it is not safe for nations, any 
more than for individuals, to muddle, since the issue may not always 
be happ}', and is at any rate always purchased at too high a price. 
It ought to be clear even to the blind, atfter the events of the past 
five years, that the destinies of America and Europe are not dis- 
connected but are inextricably intertwined and will remain so. 
\\'hether we like it or not makes no difference with the situation. 

It behooves us, therefore, to inform ourselves as thoroughly as 
we can, concerning that situation, concerning the factors and the 
forces active in the world to-day. " History," said Napoleon, " is 
the torch of truth," and contemporary history offers, of course, the 



iv PREFACE 

best approach to a knowledge of the contemporary world. It must 
therefore form an essential and important part of our educational 
program. One runs little risk in prophesying, after the experience 
through which we have recently passed, that the history of modern 
Europe will occupy increasingly the attention of Americans in the 
years to come. No one who takes his citizenship seriously can admit 
that he knows nothing and cares nothing about it. He will care, 
if he cares for the welfare of his own country. 

• It is the privilege as well as the duty of every teacher and writer 
'of modern European history to aid in this process of enlightenment. 
It is a work not only of necessary education but of elementary patriot- 
ism. The American citizen, if he is to think correctly on the prob- 
lems of his age, if he is to show intelligence and breadth of view in 
the exercise of his suffrage, must know, first the history of his own 
country, and then the history of the modern world outside. Nor 
is this a passing necessity of the hour ; it is a permanent requirement 
of the situation. Any school curriculum which makes no provision 
for this indispensable and richly rewarding study fails in a funda- 
mental obligation to America since, in that degree, it acquiesces in 
the un preparedness of the citizens of this country to meet and solve, 
with wisdom and with judgment, the great and vital questions of 
national policy. 

And no school ought to fail to give some attention to European 
history because it cannot give much. Better a little knowledge 
than none at all. Schools vary greatly in character, in resources, 
in the demands put upon them by the communities they serve. 
But where it is difficult to find time for a full year's course it may 
well be found possible to give one of a half a year or of three months. 
The present book, or any other text of a similar character and 
scope, admits of great flexibility in usage. If a teacher does not 
have the time to cover the entire ground he can with profit begin 
with 1789 or with 181 5 or with 1848 or with 1870, all, for various 
reasons, significant and natural dividing lines in modern history. 
Whichever one of these dates is taken as the point of departure the 
subsequent period will be found to present an essential unity, full 
of instruction and of suggestion of direct and obvious utility in equip- 
ping the boy or girl for life. For the study of this subject is not a 
mere self-indulgence, not a mere source of cultivation, though that 
were an amply sufficient reason for pursuing it, but is a pressing, 



PREFACE V 

urgent, and most practical requirement of the age. It is essential 
to the proper education of the American democracy. That democ- 
racy which is the best educated, not that which is merely the richest 
or the most populous, is destined to leadership in the modern world. 

C. D. H. 

Columbia University, 
December 22, 1919. 



CONTENTS 



CHAPTER 

I. 

II. 

III. 

IV. 



V. 

VI. 

VII. 

VIII. 



IX. 
X. 

XI. 

XII. 

XIII. 



XIV. 
XV. 

XVI. 

XVII. 

XVIII. 

XIX. 



INTRODUCTION 

PAGE 

England in the Seventeenth Century i 

France Under Louis XIV 27 

Europe in the Eighteenth Century 49 

The Old Regime in France 84 

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION 

begrnnesigs of the revolution ii3 

The Making of the Constitution 140 

The Legislative Assembly 156 

The Convention 175 

NAPOLEON 

The Directory 208 

The Consulate 236 

The Early Years of the Empire 251 

The Empire at its Height . . , : 273 

The Decline and Fall of Napoleon 286 

REACTION AND REVOLUTION 

The Congresses 308 

The Industrial Revolution 331 

An Era of Reform in England 339 

Reaction and Revolution in France 366 

Central Europe in Revolt 392 

The Second French Republic and the Founding of the 

Second Empire 407 

vii 



CONTENTS 



UNIFICATION 

CHAPTER PAGE 

XX. The Making of the Kingdom of Italy 419 

XXL The Unification of Germany . 435 

XXII. The Second Empire and the Franco-Prussian War . 445 



ARMED PEACE 

XXIII. The German Empire 458 

XXIV. France Under the Third Republic 483 

XXV. The Kingdom of Italy since 1870 508 

XXVI. Austria-Hungary since 1848 . 515 

XXVII. England since 1868 527 

XXVIII. The British Empire 563 

XXIX. The Partition of Africa 583 

XXX. The Small States of Europe 593 

THE NEAR AND THE FAR EAST 

XXXI. The Rise of the Balkan States 610 

XXXII. Russia to the War with Japan 628 

XXXIIT. The Far East 642 

XXXIV. Russia since the War with Japan 655 

XXXV. The Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913 660 

THE WORLD WAR 

XXXVI. The World War 679 

XXXVII. Making the Peace 760 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



PAGE 

James I 5 

King Charles the First ... 6 

John Hampden 9 

Oliver Cromwell 13 

Trial of Charles the First . . 17 

Louis XIV 29 

Vauban 30 

Strasburg in the 17th Century . 33 
Revocation of the Edict of 

Nantes 36 

The Louvre and the Tuileries . 38 
Royal Court of the Chateau de 

Versailles 41 

Gardens and Park of Versailles 

in 1668 43 

Colbert 45 

Moliere 46 

William Pitt, Earl of Chatham . 53 

Peter the Great 71 

Catherine II 76 

Maria Theresa 82 

The Palace of Versailles ... 86 
The Coach Ornamented with 
Symbols in which Louis 
XVI went to His Corona- 
tion 88 

The Parlement of Paris ... 99 

Sieyes loi 

Protestant Worship in the Wil- 
derness 104 

Montesquieu 107 

Voltaire 108 

Jean Jacques Rousseau . . . no 

Louis XVI 114 



Coronation of Louis XVI, in the 

Cathedral of Rheims, 1775 . 116 

Marie Antoinette 119 

Turgot 121 

Necker 122 

The Opening of the States-Gen- 
eral 124 

Costumes of the Three Orders . 126 

Mirabeau 128 

The Tennis Court Oath . . . 129 
The Storming of the Bastile, 

July 14, 1789 131 

The Session of August 4 . . . 133 
The March of the Women to 

Versailles, October 5, 1789 . 136 
The Palace of Versailles on Octo- 
ber 6, 1789 137 

Lafayette 140 

An Assignat 148 

The Tuileries 152 

The Return from Varennes. 

Arrival in Paris .... 143 

The Jacobin Club 161 

A Session at the Jacobin Club . 162 

Liberty Cap and Pike . . . 163 

Madame Roland 165 

The Attack Upon the Tuileries, 

August 10, 1792 . . . . 170 

The Prison of the Temple . . 173 

Marat 174 

Danton 177 

Last Portrait of Louis XVI . . 178 

The Execution of Louis XVI . 180 

The Hall of the Convention . . 183 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



199 



200 
208 



The Guillotine 187 

The Execution of Marie Antoi- 
nette 191 

MUe. Maillard, "Goddess of 

Reason" 194 

Robespierre 197 

The Fete of the Supreme Being, 

June 8, 1794 .... 
Card of Admission to the Festi 

val of the Supreme Being 
A Director in Official Costume 

Charles Bonaparte 210 

Laetitia Ramolino, Napoleon's 

Mother 211 

The House at Ajaccio in which 

Napoleon was Born . . . 212 

The Bridge of Lodi 216 

Napoleon at Areola 220 

Removal of the Bronze Horses 

from Venice, May, 1797 
Official Costume of a Member 

of the Council of the Five 

Hundred . . . 
Lucien Bonaparte . . 
Bonaparte, First Consul 

Josephine 

Josephine at Malmaison 
The Three Consuls . . 
The Duke d'Enghien . 
Napoleon Crowning Josephine 
Napoleon in the Imperial Robes 
Joseph Bonaparte, King of 

Naples 

Louis Bonaparte, King of Hol- 
land 

Elise Bonaparte, Princess of 

Lucca 263 

Pauline Bonaparte, Princess of 

Borghese 264 

Caroline Bonaparte, Duchess of 

Berg, and Marie Murat . 265 
Joachim Murat, Duke of Berg . 266 



224 



232 

233 
236 

237 
242 
248 
249 

254 
255 

261 
262 



PAGE 

Jerome Bonaparte 267 

Napoleon Receiving Queen 

Louise of Prussia at Tilsit, 

July 6, 1807 270 

Lord Nelson 271 

Queen Louise of Prussia . . . 273 

Empress Marie Louise . . . 284 

Baron vom. Stein 2891 

Pope Pius VII 291 

Napoleon's Camp Bed . . . 293 
Napoleon Returning to France, 

Decem-ber, 181 2 .... 295 
Napoleon's War Horse, 

"Marengo" 298 

The Duke of Wellington . . . 302 

Bliicher 303 

Napoleon Embarking on the 

" Bellerophon " .... 304 

The Island of St. Helena . . . 304 
Longwood, Napoleon's House at 

St. Helena 305 

Napoleon's Tomb in the In- 

valides, Paris 306 

Tomb of Napoleon at St. Helena 307 

The Congress of Vienna . . . 309 

Metternich 316 

The Old Parliament Buildings, 

Burned in 1834 .... 341 
Passing the Reform Bill in the 

House of Lords .... 348 
Queen Victoria at the Age of 

Twenty 355 

Richard Cobden 359 

John Bright 361 

Sir Robert Peel 362 

Houses of Parliament, London. 

Begun 1840, completed 

1852 363 

Louis XVIII 367 

The Construction of a Barricade 370 

Street Fighting on July 28, 1830 373 

Leopold I 377 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



PAGE 

Alexander I 379 

Louis Philippe 383 

Guizot 386 

Louis Kossuth 393 

Francis Joseph I 399 

The Parliament of Frankfort . 403 

Lamartine in 1832 408 

Napoleon III 414 

Empress Eugenie 417 

Joseph Mazzini 420 

Cavour 425 

Garibaldi 431 

Victor Emmanuel II ... . 433 

William I 436 

Bismarck 438 

Moltke 442 

Leon Gambetta 454 

The Proclamation of William I 
as German Emperor, Ver- 
sailles, January 18, 187 i . 456 

Dropping the Pilot 472 

William II 476 

Thiers 486 

Marshal MacMahon .... 490 

Jules Grevy 491 

Jules Ferry 492 

Sadi-Carnot 493 

Emile Loubet 495 

Alfred Dreyfus 497 

Interior of the Chamber of 

Deputies 501 

Theophile Delcasse 505 

Francis Deak 517 

William E. Gladstone . . . . 528 
Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Beacons- 
field 546 

Charles Stewart Parnell . . . 542 
Queen Victoria at the Age of 

Seventy-eight 549 

David Lloyd George . . . . 554 

Herbert Asquith 555 

Interior of the House of Commons 557 



PAGE 

Interior of the House of Lords . 558 
The Cabinet Room .... 560 

Majuba Hill 576 

Joseph Chamberlain . . . . 578 

Paul Kruger 579 

Lord Roberts 580 

General Gordon 590 

Lord Kitchener 591 

Oscar II 601 

The Congress of Berlin . . . 618 

Abdul Hamid 11 626 

Alexander II 632 

Nicholas II 640 

Francis Joseph 666 

Sir Edward Grey 684 

Facsimile of Article VII of the 
Treaty of 1839, which 
Guaranteed the Independ- 
ence and Perpetual Neu- 
trality of Belgium . . . 687 

King Albert I 691 

Marshal Joffre 693 

Ruins of What was Once a Fa- 
mous Spot in Picturesque 

Verdun 708 

Decorations Bestowed on the 
City of Verdun by France 

and Her Allies 709 

The "Lusitania" leaving New 

York, May i, 1915 . , . 721 
Bronze Medal Awarded to Men 
Who Helped sink the 

"Lusitania" 722 

President Wilson before the 
Joint Session of Congress, 
Severing Diplomatic Rela- 
tions with Germany, Febru- 
ary 3, 1917 724 

America's Declaration of War . 726 
Arras Cathedral, After the 

War 732 

The Ruins of Lens 733 



xu 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



General AUenby Entering Jeru- 
salem 737 

Marshal Foch 742 

Ruins of Chateau-Thierry . . 744 
Arrival of First American 

Troops in France .... 746 
First German Prisoners Cap- 
tured by the Americans in 
the Saint-Mihiel Salient . 748 
American Military Cemetery at 

Belleau Wood, France . . 752 
Compiegne Forest, France . . 757 

Croix de Guerre 758 

Internment of the German Fleet 764 

The Weimar Assembly . . . 768 

Home-Coming Parade of the 

27th Division, on Fifth 

Avenue, New York, March 

25, 1919 773 

President Poincare Opening the 

Peace Conference in Paris . 777 



Premier Clemenceau . . . . 778 

A Plenary Session of the Confer- 
ence of Paris 780 

The Signing of the Treaty of 
Versailles in the Hall of 
Mirrors 783 

Facsimile Pages of Treaty of 

Versailles with Signatures . 786 

The People of Strasburg Cele- 
brating their Reunion with 
France 797 

Expressing the National Grati- 
tude for Victory in the 
Magnificent Amphitheater 
of the Sorbonne .... 801 

Delivery of Peace Treaty to 
the Austrian Delegates in 
the Chateau of Saint-Ger- 
main 812 

The Chateau of Saint-Ger- 
main 813 



MAPS 



PAGE 

Europe in 1740. (In color) 

Frontispiece 
Italy in the Eighteenth Century, 

1770 58 

The Growth of Prussia under 

Frederick the Great ... 61 

Germany in 1789. (In color) . 68 

The Partition of Poland ... 81 

France Before the Revolution . 90 

Europe in 1789. (In color) . . 120 

France by Departments . . . 145 
Northern Italy, Illustrating 

Bonaparte's First Campaign 222 

Egypt and Syria 227 

Europe in 181 1 277 

Map Illustrating Campaigns of 

Napoleon 304 

Europe in 1815. (In color) . . 314 
Distribution of Races in Austria- 
Hungary 318 

The German Confederation, 

1815-1866. (In color) . . 322 
The Unification of Italy. (In 

color) 428 



The Growth of Prussia Since 

181S 

Canada and Newfoundland . . 
Australia and New Zealand . . 
Africa, European Possessions in 



Africa in 1919. (In color) . . 

The Rise of the Balkan States 
(In color) 

Asia in 1914. (In color) . . . 

The Balkan States According 
to the Treaty of Bucha- 
rest 

Colonial Possessions of the 
European Powers in 19 10 
(In color) 

Europe in 191 2. (In color) . 

Western Front, 1914 . . . 

Eastern Front 

The "Middle Europe" Scheme 

Italian Front 

Russia in 1918 After the Treaty 
of Brest-Litovsk . . . 

Western Front, 1918 . . , 



447 
568 
572 

587 
588 

616 

652 



676 



680 
690 
694 
701 
714 
735 

741 

750 



\ 



MODERN EUROPE 

CHAPTER I 

ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

The history of the modern world is a record of highly varied 
activity, of incessant change, and of astonishing achievement. The 
lives of men have, during the last few centuries, become in- Richness of 
creasingly diversified, their powers have been greatly multi- modem life 
plied, their horizon has been enormously enlarged. New interests 
have arisen in rich profusion to absorb attention and to provoke 
exertion. New aspirations, new emotions have come to move the 
souls of men. Amid all the bewildering phenomena of a period 
rich beyond description, one interest in particular has stood out in 
clear and growing preeminence, has expressed itself in a multitude 
of ways and with an emphasis more and more pronounced, namely, 
the determination of the race to gain a larger measure of freedom 
than it has ever known before, freedom in the life of the intellect 
and spirit, freedom in the realm of politics and law, freedom in the 
sphere of economic and social relationships. , A passion that has 
prevailed so widely, that has transformed the world so greatly, and 
is still transforming it, is one that surely merits study and abundantly 
rewards it. Its operations constitute the very pith and marrow 
of modem history. 

Not that this passion was unknown to the long ages that preceded 
the modem period. The ancient Hebrews, the ancient Greeks and 
Romans blazed the way, leaving behind them a precious heritage 
of accomplishment and suggestion, and the men who made the 
Renaissance of the fifteenth century and the Reformation of the 
sixteenth contributed their imperishable part to this slow and difficult 
emancipation of the human race. But it is in modern times that the 
pace and vigor, the scope and sweep of this liberal movement have so 



2 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

increased as unquestionably to dominate the age. Particularly 
have the last three centuries registered the greatest triumphs of this 
spirit. It is with these centuries that this book concerns itself. And 
■ the book may well begin with a memorable and momentous struggle 
in one country, England. As the story proceeds we shall see the 
drama unroll upon a wider and more spacious stage until the whole 
world is ultimately involved. 

The seventeenth century was as critical for England as the eight- 
eenth was for France, as the nineteenth was for the United States 
and for many European countries, as the early twentieth was 
of^the ^'^'^^ for the world at large. In each liberty in some vital form was 
seventeenth ^t Stake and was Only saved and strengthened after terrific 

century 

struggles and widespread disorder and disturbance. Modern 
history is the record of this passionate and grim resolution of the 
race to be free and the freedom it has finally achieved is a cable of 
many strands, to the cording of which many nations have contributed, 
strands that are closely and intimately intertwined, each one adding 
to and drawing strength from the inextricable interlacing. Let no 
nation plume itself upon being the sole or chief author or artificer of 
this proud fabric. In freedom's house are many mansions, the 
product of the cooperative spirit of multitudes of men. Now it is 
the spirit of England which is touched with liame and nerved to 
heroism, now the spirit of France, now of Italy, now of America. 
The struggles in one country help forward the struggles in another. 
It has been a cooperative undertaking of many different peoples 
and in the unfolding of this progressive movement we see action 
and reaction continually interplay. A study of modern history ought 
to banish the grotesque and infantile provincialism of peoples, ought 
to broaden their outlook and their sympathies by the revelation 
which it brings that no nation and no people monopolize virtue or 
intelligence and that the qualities and talents which have exalted the 
destinies of the race have been widely diffused, that the ark of the 
true covenant has never been in the exclusive possession of any chosen 
people. The nations are all parts one of another. 

One of the most important agencies making for liberty in 

and t^he the modern period has been the parliamentary system of gov- 

pariiamen- emment. This has been the supreme contribution of Eng- 

ary sys em ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ political education of the world. So notable an 

achievement has been neither easy nor rapid. The free institutions 



ENGLISH POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS 3 , 

of England have been the growth of manj^ centuries, the product of 
slow time. The struggle for popular government forms the very 
warp and woof of English history and is charged with interest and 
excitement, made forever memorable and glorious by the resolute 
and desperate endeavor of a long line of heroes. This story, so 
replete with incident, so impressive because of the gravity of the 
issues involved, so stormy and arresting on its personal side by 
reason of the characters and activities of the leaders in the drama, 
cannot be summarized, either here or elsewhere. It must be studied 
in detail by any one who would know it, by any one who would care 
to see at how great a price the liberty which is our common inheritance 
has been bought. 

But a few features of the story may be alluded to. England had 
had a monarch since early times ; she had had a parliament since 
the thirteenth century ; she had had her Magna Charta, formulating 
and sanctioning certain rights, since 12 15. These were, however, 
but the beginnings of things. Into what form and stature they 
might grow, how much of true liberty they might guarantee, 
remained to be seen, and long remained. In the relation and 
adjustment to each other of monarch and Parliament lay the 
crucial point. Which should have the greater weight in the state, 
and how great that weight should be was the all-important, decisive 
question. 

The great crisis in the struggle between personal monarchy and 
parliamentary government began with the advent of the House of 
Stuart to the throne of England in 1603, continued, amid ex- Advent of 
traordinary vicissitudes, all through the seventeenth century the House 
and was carried over into the eighteenth. The outcome is well 
known. Parliament finally established its unquestioned supremacy 
in the state, not only within the legislative sphere, but also over the 
executive, for by making ministers directly and constantly responsible 
to it and accountable for every act of the King, it rendered itself 
omnipotent. There only remained for the nineteenth centurv the 
question as to whether Parliament itself should represent a privileged 
class or should represent the people. The solution given was the 
triumph of democracy. 

The English Revolution of the seventeenth century had no such 
comprehensive sweep as the French Revolution of the eighteenth, 
and yet the student, in traversing its bewildering mazes, is struck 



4 ENGLAND IN THE. SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

over and over again by many. astonishing points of similarity both 
in matters of great moment and in matters of detail. Few intel- 
lectual exercises within the range of historical study could be more 
g .. instructive or rewarding than an analytical comparison of 

and French these two great movements in the two most important coun- 
Revoiutions ^^.-^g ^^ western Europe. It was because the English constitu- 
tion was destined to be widely studied and imitated abroad that this 
long and bitter and sanguinary dispute as to what that constitution 
was and ought to be was of direct interest not only to Englishmen, 
but to the rest of the world as well. The English Revolution, 
although appearing local and insular as compared with the French, 
was so in appearance only. Too much that was of inestimable value 
to the world in general la}^ upon the outcome of that struggle for it 
ever to be considered parochial. 



JAMES I AND THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS 

Trouble began with the arrival from Scotland of the first Stuart 
monarch, James I, to take the seat left vacant in 1603 by the death 
James I ©^ ^^6 Great Elizabeth. This is one of the indisputable turning 

(1603-1625) points in history. James reigned from 1603 to 1625 and the tone 
and temper of his rule may safely be imagined from a sentence in one 
of his numerous and maladroit speeches : "As it is atheism and blas- 
phemy to dispute what God can do, so it is presumptuous, and a high 
contempt in a subject to dispute what a king can do, or to say that a 
king cannot do this or that." Here was a challenge sufficiently 
explicit and, indeed, James never left his people in doubt as to his 
purposes and intentions. He claimed more extensive powers than 
any of his predecessors, a more personal and exclusive authority. 
As Englishmen were by nature tenacious of their rights and blunt 
in their assertion of them, as they were temperamentally little dis- 
posed to accept a role of passive obedience, there was here ample 
material for contention, and, from the moment James first appeared 
on English soil until his death twenty-two years later, contention 
raged over the whole field of the national life. Deep was the 
alarm, deeper the resentment aroused among the English people 
by the policies of the King and by his manifest intention to exalt 
the throne, to debase the parliament, and to subvert the liberties 
of his subjects. But no open and violent breach occurred, so slow 



JAMES THE FIRST 



were Englishmen to that wrath which brooks no compromise and 
which quits the field only when the enemy has been beaten to the 
dust. 

That irreparable breach, that indignation that asked and gave no 
quarter, were reserved for the reign of James' son. "James," says 
the historian Green, had 
"destroyed that enthusi- 
asm of loyalty which had 
been the main strength of 
the Tudor throne. He had 
disenchanted his people of 
their blind faith in the 
monarchy by a policy 
both at home and abroad 
which ran counter to every 
national instinct. He had 
alienated alike the noble, 
the gentleman, and the 
trader. In his feverish 
desire for personal rule he 
had ruined the main bul- 
warks of the monarchy." 
In other words, James 
had sowed the wind ; it 
was reserved for his suc- 
cessor to reap the whirl- James I 
wind. After a painting by E. Lutterell. 




CHARLES I AND PARLIAMENT 

Charles I had some of the qualities of a good ruler. He was hard- 
working, methodical, dignified, thrifty. He had a fine taste for art 
and literature. Tasso, Ariosto, the "Faerie Queene," above charies I 
all Shakespeare, were his delight. But he possessed a narrow (1625-1649) 
and obstinate mind. He had no range of vision, no firm broad grasp 
of public questions. He was an unqualified egotist, showing no 
spark of gratitude to those who served him, no trace of constancy 
in friendship. He was an adept in double-dealing. "He was so 
constituted by nature," wrote the Venetian ambassador, "that he 



6 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

never obliges anybody either by word or act." And he had the 
worst fault a statesman can have — he never saw things as they really 
were. He did not understand the English people, a failing character- 
istic of every monarch of the Stuart line. The Stuarts, as was said of 
the later Bourbons, learned nothing and forgot nothing. Charles lived 
in a world of dreams and theories and illusions, which were sadly 
out of harmony with the hard, blunt facts of life around him. He had 




King Ch,\rles the First 
From the painting by Vandyke, in the Gallery of the Louvre. 



a talent for intrigue but he was blind to the plain signs of the times. 
His confidence in himself was complete. 

Charles I held the same conception of the divine origin of his 

power as had his father. He held the same opinion that a single 

person, the monarch, and not the Parliament, was the central, 

policy of vital organ of the state, that the initiative in government 

should come from the throne and not from the people or the 

people's elected representatives. Unfortunately for him, Parliament 



Charles I 



CHARLES I AND PARLIAMENT 7 

was at this very time becoming more conscious of its strength than 
ever before, more determined to maintain its rights and even to 
expand them. A clash was therefore inevitable. It began at once, 
and grew rapidly in intensity. Parliament refused to vote the money 
demanded by the King and his unpopular minister, Strafford, unless 
Charles would recognize that the ministers were responsible to 
Parliament, in other words, that the control over the administration 
in domestic and foreign affairs should in last resort rest with Parlia- 
ment. This demand, intolerable in Charles' eyes, with his ideas of 
kingship, was rejected. Unable to get the necessary money in a 
legal way, by grant of Parliament, Charles resorted to methods luegai } 
long regarded by Englishmen as absolutely illegal, namely, by sections 
forced loans, which meant arbitrary taxation by the sovereign, and 
arbitrary arrest in case of refusal, or punishment of the stubborn by 
the quartering of soldiers upon them. Resistance was widespread. 
Great nobles, country gentlemen, tradesmen refused to comply with 
the exactions as illegal and were flung into prison or otherwise per- 
secuted or harassed. Strafford pressed the loans with a fierce 
energy that only inflamed the public mind and accumulated stores 
of wrath that were ultimately to be wreaked upon himself as well 
as upon the monarch he was serving. 

But such methods of filling the treasury, however vigorously 
pursued, were inadequate to the demands of the King who had 
embarked upon a foreign policy that was both expensive and 
disastrous, and Charles was forced to summon Parliament forced t(f 
once more in order to get the necessary money. It proved to summon 
be one of the most remarkable Parliaments in the history of 
England. Those who had opposed the King, those who had suffered 
imprisonment were enthusiastically elected to it. A long list of 
names which were to become dear to the lovers of liberty and of 
constitutional guarantees everywhere were on its rolls, those of Sir 
John Eliot, John P>Tn, John Hampden, and many others, masters of 
eloquence, skilled parliamentarians, exemplars of civic courage and 
love of country. Among them sat a man, new to Parliament, and 
destined in time to succeed these earlier champions as the most 
famous leader in this momentous chapter of history now beginning, 
Oliver Cromwell. 

Charles wanted money and assumed a high tone in demanding it. 
Parliament wanted a redress of grievances and adequate guarantees 



8 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

that the abuses of the past few years should cease and should never 
be renewed. Parliament went its way, subjecting to its scrutiny 
and criticism the entire field of public affairs, civil and religious, 
legislative and executive. This Parliament lasted from March, 1628, 
The Petition to March, 1629. Its most notable act was the drawing up of 
of Right a Petition of Right, one of the great documents in the history 

of popular government. It recited once more and reaffirmed the 
laws which forbade arbitrary taxation, forced loans and benevolences, 
arbitrary imprisonment without due process of law, the billeting of 
soldiers on citizens in time of peace. This Petition of Right, which 
ranks along with Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights in English 
constitutional history, was, in essence, a remorseless arraignment of 
the conduct of Charles I. Charles was forced to accept it, with all 
its emphatic limitations upon the power of the monarch. Then the 
King got his supplies, voted enthusiastically by the Parliament. 

It seemed as if Parliament's sole and exclusive right to exercise 
the taxing power was now safe and beyond dispute. Not at all. 
The danger had but just begun. Charles, having gained his imme- 
diate end, the vote of supplies, and angry at the independent and 
censorious attitude of Parliament and at the humiliation involved in 
the Petition of Right, now dissolved Parliament, and determined not 
^^ ^. to call another. For eleven years he adhered to this resolution. 

The King . ■' 

rules without From 1629 to 1640 no Parliament met in England. This was 
Pariiament ^ period of Unmitigated, autocratic rule. Practically, Charles 
was an absolute monarch, doing what he liked and as he liked. It 
was a period in which the liberties of Englishmen were largely in 
abeyance, in which autocracy in state and church reigned practically 
unchecked, a period of gloom and terror. Arbitrary taxes of one 
kind or another were imposed, ferocious sentences were visited upon 
the recalcitrant, the rights guaranteed by the Petition were rendered 
a hollow mockery. Sir John Eliot and eight members of Parliament 
were thrown into the Tower, where Eliot shortly died, one of the 
great martyrs in this fierce struggle for liberty. But Charles' 
opponents were undaunted and fought on as best they could. One 
of the outstanding incidents in this perilous time was that furnished 
by John Hampden. 

One of the ways in which Charles I tried to get money from his 
subjects without asking the consent of their representatives was 
the exaction of funds from them for the building of ships. The 



HAMPDEN'S OPPOSITION TO THE KING 



John 
Hampden 
and 
ship-money 



King maintained that this was not a tax but was simply a payment 
for exemption from the obUgation of personally defending the coun- 
try. John Hampden, a well-to-do country gentleman, refused 
to pay his assessment. His object was to force the matter 
into the courts and to arouse the attention of all England to the 
danger in which she stood by compelling a judicial decision 
as to the legality or illegality of the King's policies. Though Hamp- 
den was assessed only twenty shillings, he saw and he was resolved 

that every one should see that in 
those twenty shillings of "ship- 
money" lay the whole question as 
to whether the King or the House 
of Commons should be supreme in 
England. For if the King might 
take what money he pleased, then 
he could do as he pleased, then he 
could govern in opposition to the 
wishes of the nation, indefinitely. 
Hampden lost his case but his 
action was enormously educative 
upon public opinion and in p^^jgi^ 
the end contributed greatly of the 
to the cause of the Parlia- *^°"'^' 
ment. Of the twelve judges only 
two voted in his favor. Three 
others supported him on merely 
technical grounds, not on the merits of the case. Seven declared in 
favor of the King and laid down the broad principle that no law for- 
bidding arbitrary taxation could bind the royal will. "I never read 
or heard," said one of the judges, "that lex was rex, but it is common 
and most true that rex is lex." Finch, the Chief -Justice, summed up 
the opinion of the court in the statement: "Acts of Parliament to 
take away the King's royal power in the defense of his kingdom 
are void ; they are void Acts of Parliament to bind the King not to 
command the subjects, their persons, and goods, and I say their 
money too, for no Acts of Parliament make any difference." 

If this decision of the judges were accepted by Englishmen as the 
law of the land there need never be another Parliament in England, 
for the King could raise what money he chose and consequently 




John Hampden 
From a print by I. Houbraken. 



10 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

could govern as he chose, without let or hindrance. But by their 
very clearness and explicitness these judges greatly contributed in 
the end to the diminution of the royal power. Englishmen would 
have no such monarchy as that, without at least a struggle. This 
struggle they now had and it was highly sensational in character and 
left the monarchy provisionally in ruins and permanently trans- 
formed. For while monarchy, temporarily wrecked, was later 
restored, it never became again the institution it had been. 

At this exceedingly complicated chapter of English history we can 
only glance. The reader must go elsewhere for any adequate 
description of the English Civil War and the amazing convulsions 
which caused England to rock and reel for twenty years. Every 
aspect of the national life was involved, every aspect changed. 
Religion was joined with politics in this wild and frenzied contest, 
religious passions heightened the flames ignited by political passions 
and scorching, indeed, was the ensuing conflagration. It is an 
absorbing and lurid story. But we are interested here in following 
one thread only in this wondrously tangled skein, the fortunes of 
King and Parliament in their struggle for supremacy and control. 

A mere summary of events must suflfice. In 1640, after ruling 
for eleven years without a Parliament, Charles was forced to call 
The Short that body again because he was involved in a war with Scot- 
Parliament la^nd and needed more money than he could get by the various 
arbitrary processes to which he had been resorting. This body is 
known as the Short Parliament, as it lasted only twenty-three days, 
when it was dissolved, so greatly was the King irritated at its attitude. 
But Charles' needs continuing, he was again forced to call the 
people's representatives, and in November, 1640, there assembled 
the Long Parliament, so-called because it continued in exist- 
Pariiament encc, in One form or another, for thirteen years. It was 
summoned, immediately apparent that the heat of controversy had not 
cooled. Parliament would not vote a penny either for the 
Scotch war or for anything else without first squaring accounts with 
the King. It prosecuted his two chief agents of oppression in state 
and church, the Earl of Strafford, and, later. Laud, Archbishop of 
Canterbury, and brought about their execution. It demanded a 
comprehensive redress of grievances and it raked the conduct and 
policy of the reign with a devastating fire of criticism. It drew up 
a Grand Remonstrance, a popular manifesto setting forth the whole 



CHARLES AND THE FIVE MEMBERS ii 

dark case against the monarch and asserting the rights of ParUament. 
The King, infuriated, resolved to crush this mounting spirit of opposi- 
tion once for all. On January 4, 1642, accompanied by a band „, . 
of cavaliers, armed with swords and pistols, Charles I went to and the 
Westminster Hall, resolved to seize five members of the House niembers 
of Commons who were most obnoxious to him. Among these of the House 
were Pym and Hampden. Leaving his band of "rufiflers" 
outside, Charles, attended by his nephew, crossed the inviolable 
threshold of the House of Commons which no king might lawfully 
cross, advanced up the chamber to the Speaker's chair and demanded 
the five members, asking the Speaker if they were there. Speaker 
Lenthall's reply has remained historic and will long so remain. 
"May it please your Majesty," he said, kneeling before him in all 
outward reverence, "I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak 
in this place, but as the House is pleased to direct me." "Well, 
well," Charles retorted angrily, "'tis no matter. I think my eyes 
are as good as another's." Looking over the assembly he discovered 
that his intended victims were not present. They had, indeed, 
been hurried out by their fellow members at the first rumor of the 
King's approach. "I see," said Charles at last, "all my birds are 
flown, but I do expect you will send them to me." If they did not, 
he added, he would take his own method of getting them. He then 
withdrew from the House amid shouts of "Privilege! Privilege!" 
from the indignant members. He went out, says an eye-witness, 
"in a more discontented and angry passion than he came in." 



ENGLAND'S CIVIL WAR 

This attempt of the King to coerce Parliament aroused deep and 
universal horror and resentment. The people of England were 
inexpressibly shocked in their innermost feelings. So raw an outrage 
upon law and decency was a natural incitement to civil war. As a 
matter of fact, the King, in crossing that sacred threshold, had really 
crossed the Rubicon. A week later the five returned, in tri- Beginning 
umph, to the chamber amid the frenzied acclamations of the °^ ^^^^ ^^^ 
people. Charles withdrew from London and a few months later 
on the evening of a stormy day, August 22, 1642, raised the royal 
standard in the courtyard of the castle that crowned the hill at 
Nottingham. England's Civil War began. The question as to 



12 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

who should rule the island that was set in the silver sea was to be 
answered by the primitive and immemorial process of the race in 
settling its high disputes, namely, by the appeal to force. 

The war between King and Parliament lasted several years and 
brought in its train the most surprising changes. As England had 
The King's ^o Standing army each side was obliged to get recruits as best 
supporters [^ could and to train and equip them as rapidly as possible. 
The King was supported in general by a majority of the members of • 
the House of Lords and by a strong minority of the Commons as well. 
Catholics and High Church Episcopalians were in his ranks. The 
majority of the Commons, the Presbyterians, and the dissenters 
The from the Established Church, particularly the advanced 

Independents Puritans or Independents, as they were called, were on the side 
of Parliament. These Independents or Separatists were destined 
shortly to become the leaders of the "Rebellion," as the King called 
it. They rejected both the Episcopal and the Presbyterian form of 
church organization and held that each community should organize 
and control its own church. They were Congregationalists. Having 
been persecuted in the past some of them had fled for refuge to Hol- 
land and later to America. The Pilgrim Fathers and the Puritans 
who founded the colony of Massachusetts Bay were of this class. 
While the term " Puritan" was frequently used very loosely to cover 
most Protestants, whether Low Church Episcopalians, Presbyterians, 
or Independents, it gradually became especially identified with the 
last, as the most radical reformers in religious matters and in social 
usages. The revolution which was now impending is known in his- 
tory as the Puritan Revolution. 

For two years the Civil War dragged on a doubtful course, with 
ups and downs for either side. Then occurred a change. The 
parliamentary cause found an incomparable leader, a man emerging 
rapidly from the confusion of the times, singularly endowed for just 
such work as the times demanded, a man destined to go far in the 
military and civil contentions of his age, and to play so commanding 
and unique a part as to give his name to this period of English 
history. 

"I was by birth a gentleman, living neither in any considerable 
height nor yet in obscurity," such was Oliver Cromwell's account of 
himself. Cromwell came of an important country family, widely 
connected, and long conspicuous for sturdy loyalty and public spirit 



THE EARLY LIFE OF CROMWELL 



13 



Cromwell 



His father and three of his uncles had sat in the later Parliaments of 
Elizabeth. John Hampden was his cousin. Born in 1599 he had 
the grammar school education of his native town, Huntingdon, ^^^j jj^^ 
and at the age of seventeen he entered Cambridge University, of diver 
The day of his matriculation was the very day on which 
Shakespeare died at 
Stratford-on -Avon. 
But the spirit of 
the Renaissance, so 
marvelously person- 
ified in the great 
poet, never breathed 
upon young Crom- 
well. The radiance 
of art and literature 
left him cold. He 
was the offspring 
of a very different 
spirit, the authentic 
and faithful child of 
Puritanism and for 
him, as some one has 
said, "a single vol- 
ume comprehended 
all literature, and 
that volume was the 
Bible." Intense re- 
ligiousness, extraor- 




O1.1VER Cromwell 



dinary energy of character, independence of judgment, fearlessness in 
conduct were early seen to be outstanding features of his personality. 
He had been a member of several Parliaments, but it was the 
Civil War that first brought him into prominence. It revealed the 
fact that he was a born soldier and consummate leader of men. 
Cromwell saw the defects of the parliamentary army, the rea- reorganizes 
son why it was not conquering the King's aristocratic troops. ^^^ ^^^^ 
"A set of poor tapsters and town apprentices," he said, "would never 
fight against men of honor." They must be fired with an emotion 
equal to that of the chivalry of the Cavaliers and that emotion must 
be religious enthusiasm. Cromwell proceeded to organize first his regi- 



14 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

ment, and after that the army, on a system new in military history. 
" I raised such men," he later related to Parhament, "as had the fear 
of God before them, as made some conscience of what they did ; 
and from that day forward, I must say to you, they were never 
beaten, and whenever they were engaged against the enemy, they 
beat continually." Here we have the war in a nutshell and the 
reason for its success. No swearing, no drinking was tolerated 
among Cromwell's troops. Men intensely in earnest, God-fearing, 
Bible-reading, hating impiety in every form, fond of prayer-meetings, 
they constituted, as Cromwell said with pride, "a lovely company." 
They were the best-trained soldiers in Europe. In discipline and 
skill and valor Cromwell's "Ironsides" profoundly impressed the 
imagination of that day and their desperate courage and fiery zeal 
swept all before them. Memorable, indeed, were their victories at 
Marston Moor (1644) and at Naseby (1645), under the inspiring 
Marston leadership of this Huntingdon gentleman-farmer, now become 

Moor and " a.n almost ideal general of cavalry — furious in the charge, 

Naseby ° ^ ° 

rapid in insight, wary, alert, and master of himself," as one of 
his biographers justly says. "God made them as stubble to our 
swords. . . . Give glory, all the glory, to God," wrote Cromwell 
concerning Marston Moor. "God our Strength" was the watch- 
word of the day of Naseby. "He seldom fights without some text 
of Scripture to support him," wrote a chaplain of this pious and 
pulverizing general. 

Beneath the impact of warriors energized as were these, every one 
of whom considered himself a divinely appointed agent for the 
chastisement of the wicked, the royal armies were scattered like 

Defeat chaff. The forces of Parliament were everywhere victorious. 

of Charles jj^ j5^y Charles was driven to take refuge with the Scotch army, 
which forthwith surrendered him to Parliament. The Civil War 
was over. 

With the surrender of the person of the King the crisis was safely 
passed. Royal pretensions were defeated, the danger of absolute 
rule was averted, Parliament was supreme. But a new crisis began 
at once to develop, intricate, obscure, fateful. No sooner had the war 
ceased than party spirit in Parliament revived in full vigor. Political 
warfare as bitter and destructive as the military warfare raged in 
England for several years. Its course can only be summarized here, 
most inadequately. Revolutions do not quickly subside but are 



TRIANGULAR NEGOTIATIONS 15 

wont to pass through several phases each more extreme than its 
predecessor, and England was at this moment in mid-revolution. 

And first, there was a triangular contest between the King, the 
Parliament, and the army. The King, though a prisoner, had many 
supporters and represented the principle of authority based The King the 
upon centuries of history. Parliament represented the prin- Parliament, 
ciple of representative government and favored making the ^°** ^^^ *"°^ 
Presbyterian form of church organization and doctrine the established 
and sole religious system of the land, to which all should be compelled 
to conform. The army demanded the effective guarantee of civil 
liberty and, what was new and startling, real religious toleration. 
It was opposed to Presbyterian domination in the state, as it was 
opposed to the restoration of the monarch to this throne. The 
toleration praised by Cromwell and by Milton, a greater intellect, 
excluded, it is true, the Catholics from its protecting circle, but was 
broad and spacious enough for all shades of Protestantism and 
represented a great advance upon the previous religious thought of 
Englishmen. Whether in action these Independents would live up 
to the liberality of their thought remained, of course, to be seen. 

Events quickly precipitated memorable actions which landed 
the army in the saddle and made the idol of the army the real ruler 
of England. In 1648 Parliament was negotiating with the captive 
King with a view to his restoration to power on the basis of his 
acceptance of Parliament's view concerning religious organization. 
Charles, a born intriguer, spun out the negotiations, exultant at the 
prospect of splitting his enemies. At the same time Parliament 
showed its fierce intolerance in passing an ordinance for the suppres- 
sion of blasphemies and heresies, which Cromwell had long opposed. 
This ordinance decreed the penalty of death to those who held certain 
opinions on doctrinal matters, and imprisonment of all who held that 
church government by Presbytery was anti-Christian or unlawful. 

The army, vigorously opposed to any restoration of the King 

and independent in its religious feelings, was indignant at the turn 

things were taking. Its formal remonstrances passed unheeded. 

Then it struck, and struck hard. On the morning of December 6, 

1648, Colonel Pride was stationed with a body of troops at the „ . . , „ 

11- Pndes Purge 
door of the House of Commons for the purpose of excludmg 

such members of the House as were displeasing to the army officers. 

Over forty members were arrested and on the following day more 



i6 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

than sixty others, and many who were not arrested were prevented 
from entering the Chamber. This outrage is known in history as 
Pride's Purge. There was no trace of legality in it. It was an act of 
pure mihtary violence and it was nothing else. "By what right do 
you act?" a member asked. "By the right of the sword," is said 
to have been the response. The army installed itself in the place of 
power, and power uncontrolled save by its own will. The whole 
previous system of English government reeled under the terrific 
blow. Parliament and Monarchy were scorned and flouted by the 
soldiery. The House of Commons continued in its mutilated state, 
a mere phantom, entirely dependent upon the army. By the mon- 
strous exclusion of over a hundred and forty members it now counted 
only fifty or sixty regular attendants and was called in the coarse 
language of the people the " Rump." 

It was this body which, under orders from the army, created a 
High Court of Justice to try the King. On January 20, 1649, the 
trial began. Charles refused to make any defense, flatly deny- 
execution of ing the authority of the Coyft. The Court consisted of only the 
Charles I bitterest enemies of the King, for only such would consent to 
act as members of it. On the 27th, Charles was sentenced to death 
as a tyrant and a traitor to his country. Three days later he was 
beheaded in front of his palace of Whitehall, an enormous crowd 
looking on. In this supreme and awful moment he bore himself 
with unflinching fortitude. Lord Morley, in his life of Cromwell, 
characterizes the High Court of Justice that did this famous and 
melancholy deed as neither better nor worse than an ordinary drum- 
head court-martial, and he adds: "The two most sensible things 
to be said about the trial and execution of Charles I have often 
been said before. One is that the proceeding was an act of war, 
and was just as defensible or just as assailable, and on the same 
grounds, as the war itself. The other remark, though tolerably 
conclusive alike by Milton and by Voltaire, is that the regicides 
treated Charles precisely as Charles, if he had won the game, un- 
doubtedly promised himself with law or without law that he would 
treat them. The author of the attempt upon the Five Members 
in 1642 was not entitled to plead punctilious demurrers to the revo- 
lutionary jurisdiction. From the first it had been My head or thy 
head, and Charles had lost." 



TRIAL OF CHARLES THE FIRST 




Trial of Charles the First 



A, the King; B, the lord president, Bradshaw; G, table with mace and sword; 
H, benches for the Commoners ; /, arms of the Commonwealth, which the usurpers 
have caused to be affixed ; K, Oliver Cromwell ; M, spectators. 



i8 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

THE COMMONWEALTH AND CROMWELL 

The monarch had fallen, but had the monarchy? Charles I left 
a son, known in history as Charles II. But Charles II was not des- 
Engiand fined to begin his reign until many eventful years had inter- 

a republic vcned. The " Rump Parliament " as the mutilated fragment of 
the House of Commons was derisively called, voted that henceforth 
England should be a Commonwealth, that is, a republic, instead of a 
kingdom. The old institutions were now defunct and England was 
launched upon a series of constitutional experiments which proved 
difificult and short-lived. The monarch was gone, the House of 
Lords had ceased to exist, the House of Commons, such as it was, 
was the center of authority, and was to work in conjunction with a 
Council of State, composed of members of the House and of generals 
of the army. This Council of State, consisting of forty-one indi- 
viduals, was to be the executive. 

But during the period the real ruler was Oliver Cromwell, the idol 
of the army. It had been the army that had effected this trans- 
formation of the government ; it was the army that now formed 
V^^ ^ the real center of power. The army had been essentially the 
wealth creation of Cromwell and it was the strongest military force 

the*army'^ in Europe. Had the republic not had the army behind it, it 
could not have long endured, as unquestionably the great 
majority of Englishmen were monarchists to the core. The govern- 
ment of the Commonwealth was governed by a minority. 

The new regime found itself encompassed on all sides with enemies. 

Disruptive passions were everjrwhere unloosed ; wild ideas were 

The Irish ^^ ^^^ ^^^' ^^^ three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and 

support Ireland were falling apart ; a general dissolution of the 

hariesn state and of society seemed impending. Ireland proclaimed 

Charles II as King and Irish Catholics and Irish royalist Protestants 

were organizing to overthrow the Commonwealth. The Scotch 

were tending in the same direction. Meanwhile foreign countries, 

horrified by the execution of the King, looked askance and glowered. 

Through this mass of dangers Oliver Cromwell, the man of the 

hour, hacked his way with swiftness and success and made Britaim 

more unified than she had ever been, more powerful, and more feared 

and respected abroad. The immediate point of danger was Ireland 

and thither Cromwell was dispatched. He fell upon the unhappy 



CROMWELL IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND 19 

land like a thunderbolt. His campaign opened with an incident that 
has left a deep stain upon his name, the storming of Drogheda (Sep- 
tember 3, 1649) or rather the "massacre" of two thousand _ „ 
people, after the storming, and in a frenzy of rage, quarter being conquers 
refused. " I am persuaded," said Cromwell, after the butchery, ^'■^'*°'* 
"that this is a righteous judgment of God upon these barbarous 
wretches, who have imbrued their hands in so much innocent 
blood ; and that it will tend to prevent the effusion of blood for 
the future. Which are the satisfactory grounds to such actions, 
which otherwise cannot but mark remorse and regret." This victory 
was followed by a rapid series of others and Ireland was thoroughly 
conquered, and with ruthless severity. Then she was pitilessly 
punished. A large part of the land was confiscated and handed 
over to Englishmen and the native landowners became fugitives in 
the poor and desolate parts of their country. Cromwell sowed in 
Ireland a plentiful supply of dragon's teeth. His "settlement" 
of affairs has been hated ever since with a deep and abiding hatred. 
To this day the peasants of Ireland speak of the "Curse of 
Cromwell." 

Scotland's turn came next. Charles II had landed there from 
France, whither he had fled upon the death of his father. The 
whole Scottish nation was behind him and a large part of the Defeats the 
people of England were only waiting until it should be safe Scotch 
for them to support his cause. Cromwell's conquest of Scotland 
was even more rapid than that of Ireland. At Dunbar, on Septem- 
ber 3, 1650, he seized his opportunity and added to his roll of victories 
another resounding name. His army advanced to the charge with 
the watchword, "The Lord of Hosts." The clash was fierce but 
lasted only an hour. Above the roar of the battle Cromwell was 
heard shouting, "Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered," and 
as the tide turned he sang the 117th Psalm, "O praise the Lord, 
all ye nations ; praise him, all ye people." The victory was complete, 
3000 of the enemy killed on the field, thousands more in the sub- 
sequent chase, 10,000 prisoners, all the artillery taken, 15,000 stand 
of arms, 200 flags. 

A year later another battle and another victory, that of Worcester, 
and Cromwell sheathed his sword, his military career at an end. 
Charles II fled to the Continent, there to spend a decade eating the 
bitter bread of exile. 



20 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

"Peace hath her victories no less renowned than war," sang 
Milton in the sonnet which he wrote at this time in honor of the 
Lord-General. Cromwell was now fifty-two years of age and at the 
height of his power and prestige. His return to London was one 
long triumphal journey. The House of Commons formally thanked 
him for his services, voted him a large income and placed at his 
disposal Hampton Court, erected by the magnificent Woolsey in his 
Cromwell's ^^^'^ ^^ pride. Cromwell was now virtually dictator, so vast 
commanding was his influence, though technically he was only a member of 
posi ion ^y^^ Council of State. He bore himself with modesty and for 

more than a year and a half he cooperated energetically with the 
other members of that body in the pressing and thorny tasks of 
restoring order in a state whose life had been shaken and torn by the 
unexampled convulsions of the time. Essentially conservative by 
nature, he labored incessantly for a sound and just "settlement of 
this nation," a task bristling with difficulties, a task to which he 
devoted the remainder of an arduous and singularly unselfish life, a 
problem for which, however, he was never destined to find a solution. 
To evolve order from chaos requires more time than was to be 
vouchsafed the leader of the Ironsides. 

The ideal of the " Commonwealth Men" was a high one, that of a 
free state controlled by the elected representatives of the people 
and guaranteeing liberty of thought and speech, but the difficulty 
in the way of the realization of this ideal lay in the fact that were a 
new Parliament freely elected it would probably prove a royalist 
body. The people of England had resented the arbitrary conduct 
of the King, Charles I, but they were monarchists still, not republi- 
cans. They believed neither in a Commonwealth, nor in reli- 
opposed gious liberty, the very things in which the army passionately 

to military believed. Cromwell and his friends had no desire to set up 

government '^ 

government by the army. They wished government by civil- 
ians, government by an executive and a Parliament. But Cromwell 
did not for a moment desire an executive representing Parliament and 
dependent upon it, in other words the system which, after prolonged 
contentions and many fluctuations of fortune, has finally been 
established in England. He wished the executive to be independent, 
the Parliament to be independent, both to be coordinate, neither to 
be subject to the other. Whereas the fundamental feature of the 
parliamentary system as we see it in operation to-day is the fusion 



CROMWELL AND PARLLAMENT 21 

of the executive and the legislature, Parliament really choosing the 
executive and controlling it. 

Cromwell's mind was massive and solid, essentially moderate and 
conservative, keenly observant, intensely practical. Yet he was 
driven by the irresistible pressure of events into many a radical 

1 , . . A 1 1- • T^ 1- 1 Cromwell's 

and revolutionary action. 4 believer in Parliament, he got difficulties 
along no better with it than had Charles I and it was the pro- ^'*^. 
found irony of his life that he delivered it more deadly blows 
than ever the King had been able to, and that during the course of 
his career as ruler he resorted to many of the practices for which 
Charles and Strafford and Laud had been compelled to pay the 
supreme and awful price. 

One of the most famous of these blows was given in the j^ear 1653 
and is, after the execution of the King, the most conspicuous land- 
mark in the history of the times. The "Rump" Parliament was 
still in existence, that is, what remained after thirteen years and 
various "purges" of the famous Long Parliament called by Charles I 
in 1640. No new election had occurred, no new appeal to the voters 
during all these years. Cromwell and his officers continually urged 
the Parliament to dissolve. Parliament declined to do so. It 
continued its debates, becoming constantly more and more unpopular. 
Some of its members accepted bribes, others were especially eager 
to secure fat appointments for relatives. Negotiations went on 
between the leaders of Parliament and the army, looking toward a 
dissolution and a new election. No agreement could be reached. 
Each side had its own plan, and finally on April 20, 1653, Parliament 
passed the one it favored, and the one the army disapproved. 

Then occurred a famous scene. "This is thfe time," said Crom- 
well to a friend, "I must do it." He rose and began to speak, 
reproaching Parliament bitterly for its numerous faults and its 
rrife,ny sins of omission and commission. Then, his passion dissolves 
mounting, he told them that the Lord had done with them and t^e Long 
had chosen other and worthier instruments for carrying on His 
work. Some one interrupted him, whereupon he became enraged. 
Clapping his hat on his head and leaving his seat he stamped up 
and down the floor of the House, saying, "You are no Parliament, 
I say you are no Parliament. Come, come, we have had enough 
of this : I will put an end to your prating. Call them in." Where- 
upon the doors opened and in came a troop of musketeers. Sir 



22 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

Henry Vane cried out in protest, whereupon Cromwell turned upon 
him, shouting, "O, Sir Henry Vane, Sir Henry Vane, the Lord 
deliver me from Sir Henry Vane." He hurled brutal and coarse 
epithets at this member and that. Pointing at the Speaker, he said, 
"Fetch him down," and indicating Algernon Sidney, he ordered 
the soldiers to "put him out." Picking up the mace, the symbol of 
the authority of the House, he said, "What shall we do with this 
bauble? Here, take it away," and gave it to a musketeer. He 
ordered the House cleared of all its members and as they passed 
out, he shouted: "It is you that have forced me to do this, for I 
have sought the Lord night and day that He would rather slay me 
than put me on the doing of this work!" He then commanded 
that the doors be locked, and went back to Whitehall. 

This is one of the most famous scenes in English history and one 
of the most outrageous. It remains as one of the indelible blots upon 
Cromwell's career. The Huntingdon farmer had eclipsed Charles I, 
king by divine right, in the art of destroying venerable institutions. 
No great sympathy need be wasted upon Parliament. It was only a 
Rump and after its various "purges" and proscriptions had become 
a mere semblance of a legislature. Strictly it rested upon no more 
solid basis of legality than did Cromwell himself. Yet it stood, 
after all, for the old tradition of Parliament and many of the old 
associations clustered about it in men's minds. Its destruction 
by military force and amid a torrent of unrestrained abuse and 
contumely was a grave and lamentable shock to the public mind. 
Moreover it did not decrease Oliver's difficulties as he proceeded 
on his stormful way. As a detail, it shows us Cromwell in one of the 
few moments in his life when he completely lost his temper. 

The English constitution was no more. Every political institution 

of England now lay in ruins. King, Lords, and Commons had been 

overthrown. Cromwell alone remained standing amid this 

Cromwell . , . ,.^ , 

virtually welter of ruin, and Cromwell for the rest of his life was virtual 

dictator dictator, without the title of king but with more power than 

any Stuart ever wielded. 

Attempts, not very successful, were made to cover up this Cromwell- 
ian dictatorship, which Cromwell himself did not for a moment 
desire but which he felt was imposed upon him by God. Having 
destroyed the Long Parliament, he called another composed of 
"persons fearing God," specially selected by himself and the officers 



THE PROTECTORATE 23 

of the army at the suggestion of the "godly clergy." This proved 
such an impracticable and crotchety assembly that it passed away 
unregretted after a life of five months. It is known in history as 
Praisegod Barebone's Parhament, after the rather unusual name of 
one of its members. Before ending its existence this Parliament 
formally resigned its powers into the hands of the Lord-General. 

For nearly five years, from 1653 to 1658, Cromwell bore the title of 
Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. He was king in all but 
name, and more than king in power. His authority nominally 
rested upon an Instrument of Government, a document drawn Lord 
up by the leading officers of the army, the first and only ^f'^the'^''"^ 
written constitution England has ever had. The Instrument common- 
established a Parliament also and Cromwell called several Par- ^® * 
liaments during his "reign," but could work with them no better than 
with former ones and dismissed them or broke them as occasion re- 
quired. The important feature of the histor}^ of these years is the rule 
of the one man. Cromwell never succeeded in bringing about that 
permanent settlement in the institutions and life of England which 
he ardently desired and which he recognized as so necessary after 
the many turbulent and destructive years that had passed since 
the Stuarts first challenged the liberties of Englishmen. Cromwell 
could not build a S3^stem and an order that could endure, could 
not rally the people of England about him in enthusiastic and hearty 
cooperation, for the simple reason that his ideas and those of the 
majority did not agree. In this respect his work proved ephemeral. 
He could only build on shifting sands. His rule was really a military 
rule and he was more despotic than ever Charles I had been. But 
his aims and his character were far higher. 'He was honest and 
upright and unselfish and the fundamental things for which he stood 
were unquestionably for the good of England. And as one of his 
biographers, Frederic Harrison, correctly says: "In the whole 
modern history of Europe, Oliver is the one ruler into whose presence 
no vicious man could ever come ; whose service no vicious man might 
enter." 

In one respect his rule shone with a peculiar splendor. His foreign 
policy was one of great success. He had one of the qualities without 
which no ruler can be truly great ; he surrounded himself with able 
men, and used their services to the utmost. He was himself a 
man of large mold and fitted for large affairs. This was as apparent 



24 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

in his foreign policies as in his domestic. In the great contest that 

was going on between France and Spain, he took sides with France 

The Both were Catholic countries, but one was tolerant, protecting 

Protectors j^g Protestants in a considerable way by the Edict of Nantes ; 

brUhant ,, ,, ^ -^ ^ . . >t 

foreign the Other represented the very essence oi intolerance. More- 

pohcy over, apart from this, England had her special reasons 

for disliking Spain, a country that was strenuously opposed to 
England's claims in the field of American commerce and colonization. 
"His greatness at home," wrote Clarendon, a contemporary and 
by no means a friendly critic of Cromwell, "was but a shadow of the 
glory he had abroad." The English and the French won a great 
victory over Spain, and England thereby gained Dunkirk and the 
island of Jamaica in the West Indies. The period of the Common- 
wealth and the Protectorate was also the period of the great struggle 
between England and Holland for commercial supremacy, and 
England by her Navigation Act of 165 1, and by the naval war that 
followed, achieved here also a large measure of success. England 
again became a European power of the first rank as she had not been 
since the time of the Plantagenets. Foreign nations feared and 
courted her. "There is not a nation in Europe," said Cromwell, 
"but is very willing to ask a good understanding with you," in 
which modest phrase lay a great and justifiable pride. The Venetian 
ambassador to England declared that the court of Cromwell was the 
most brilliant, and the most respected in Europe ; that six kings had 
sent ambassadors to seek his interest and regard. Louis XIV sent 
a mission of great magnificence to the Protector to present to him 
a sword of honor, studded with precious stones. It was not an 
Englishman, but a foreigner, who later said, "Cromwell, with his 
lofty character, is the most enlightened statesman who ever adorned 
the Protestant world." 

At the zenith of his power, and in his fifty-ninth year, Cromwell 
died, on the third of September, 1658, the anniversary of two of 
Death of his most famous victories, Dunbar and Worcester. After a 

Cromwell public funeral of great pomp, his body was borne to West- 
minster Abbey and there buried. 



COLLAPSE OF CROMWELL'S SYSTEM 25 

THE RESTORATION 

Then the system he had built up rapidly collapsed. His son, 
Richard, succeeded him as Protector, but, utterly unequal to the 
situation, was forced to abdicate after a few months. Then chariesii 
Charles H, son of Charles I, came from France, and the historic (1660-1685) 
monarchy was restored. Lords and Commons also were restored 
amid manifestations of popular approval. The day of the attempt 
at religious toleration was over, and the reign of Charles II was one 
of pronounced religious oppression, known for its Act of Uniformity, 
Test Act, Conventicle Act, and Five Mile Act, statutes of great 
harshness leveled not only at Catholics but at Presbyterians and 
Independents as well. There was a great revulsion, also, from the 
austere morality of Puritanism and the new reign was one of lax 
moral standards. And a touch of ignoble savagery was added to 
the record by the order of the House of Commons that Cromwell's, 
body should be taken from the Abbey, that it should be hung from 
the gallows of Tyburn, and that the head should be fixed upon a 
pole and set up in front of Westminster Hall. This odious deed 
was done. 

In regard to the fundamental issue which lay at the center of all 
the troubled history narrated in this chapter, the relation of King 
and Parliament and their respective powers, nothing was definitely 
settled. That problem went over to the next century, as we shall 
see. Charles II had the same high conception of the prerogatives 
of the King as had his Stuart predecessors, the same dislike of Parlia- 
ment, but he was too prudent to force the issue to the breaking point, 
too little disposed to run the risk of being seht "on his travels" 
again. And so he died in bed as King of England, in 1685. 

But his brother, James II, had no such modicum of discretion, 
and therefore he spent three years only in Whitehall. He was an 
avowed Catholic, his wife was Catholic, and he showed unmis- james ir 
takably that he desired the restoration of Catholicism in Eng- (1685-1688) 
land. This possibility Englishmen were in no mood to tolerate, and 
the famous Revolution of 1688 was the result. Mary, James' 
daughter, was a Protestant, and had married William of Orange, the 
leader of the Protestants of the Continent. William and Mary 
were invited to England by the Protestants of every shade. James 
fled to France. Parliament drew up another of the great documents 



26 ENGLAND IX THK SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 

of En^^Iish liberty, the Hill of Kights (1689) by which the Kingw; 
forbidden to suspend or violate the laws, to levy taxes or raise troo[;s 
without the consent of Parliament, to deny his subjects the full 
exercise of the rij^ht of petition, or to curtail the right of trial by jury. 
William and jMary, accepting these provisions, were recognized ]jy 
Parliament as the lawful sovereigns of England. 

Such is what is called "The Glorious Revolution" of 1688. What 

it signified is this : Parliament, not the King, was the supreme power 

jj,,. of the state, since Parliament, not Divine Right, could deter- 

Kcvoiution ininc the succession to the throne. Parliament had rejected 

James II, lawful King, and had not put in his place his son, his 

lawful successor. It was evident that if Parliament could do this, 

could set aside a legitimate monarch for one more to its taste, then 

Parliament, and not the monarchy, was paramount. Other struggles 

were necessary to fashion out of this parliamentary supremacy that 

form of government which we call the "cabinet system," and which 

we know to-day. Hut an important milestone in the progress of 

ICnglish constitutional development and of popular liberty was set 

up by the revolutionists of 1688. 

REFERENCES 

Cheney, A SliorL llislnry of Kni^land, pp. .38,3-558. 

Ckoss, a History oj Jinghuul ami Greater Britain, pp. 427-675. 

Okkkn, a Short History of the English People, Chaps. VIII-IX. 

Chicynky, Readings in English History, pp. 418-590. 

RoKiNSON, Readings in European History, Vol. II, Chap. XXX. 

Oakdinick, The Puritan Resolution. 

Cf)r,invjN Smttii, 7^he United Kingdom. 

MouiAW, Oliver Cromwell. 

IIakkison, Oliver Cromwell. 

(JARUiNEK, Cromwell's Place in History. 



FRAXcr: t\i>»hi< i>o(;j,s xiv 

IMI'OHTAXr;/; or l HANC;/. in MOf;hJ<\ JJIS'IOPV 

WnfiN l^^^uis XIV iissumtd corrimand of the state, ujx^n the death 
of Mazarin, in i66f, the golden aj^e of monarchy began for France 
and for KurofXi, I'he Ir^ng and diflficiilt protx-ss of growth now 
produced a rare and luxuriant fruitage. A turbulent and un- Loui» xiv, 
certain hhtory culminate<J in an amazing exaltation of the "^"^^ '^'' 
rn(m'dir<;hy and the monarch, and one which long <\'d//AfA the minds 
of men. From that time forth, for a century and a half, one nation 
^xxtipierJ the center of the stage, France, powerful in the sphere of 
af;tion, influential in the realm of thought, France was the mr^st 
<xnspicuoas and imp«^;rtant state in Kurofx; by reasr^n of her vitality 
and energy and ambition, by reasr^n of her large res^junxs in men 
and in wf;alth, and also because of her form of government which 
was well adapted tf> enable her to assume an aggressive and expansive 
p'-jlicy. Her prr/sperity and her prjwer shone against the background 
of a a^ntinent dividerj intr; small states and into two or thrfx- large 
ones which, like Austria and Spain, were dwJining in strength, 
although still far from being negligible quantities. France was 
the most coherent, ajmpact state in Europe. She had solved more 
of her f^sential problems than had the other nations, and the energies 
of her \>cj)\A(: harJ (\(:wi-\()\)cA U) a higher pit/;h, Frana;, Austria, and 
Spain ha^J long b*:^;n involved in struggles with ear;h other for su- 
premaf.-y. The changing fortunes of their tease and bitter rivalry 
had h>een shown in the murderous Thirty Years' War (lOiH-iO^H) 
through which FCurof>e harl only rw;ently pass<:rj, the longf:;st, mr^t 
gfmeral, and m'^/st devastating war the Continent ha^J ever known, 
and whr^rf; outrx^me indicate^] unmistakably the waxing of Franrx 
and the waning of the other two, 'I*hat was ende^J by the Treaty of 
V\'c-stphalia (1648) but the rivalry was to carry over into the reign 

27 



28 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 

of Louis XIV and, indeed, was largely to dominate it, although its 
issue was no longer seriously in doubt. 

Louis XIV has himself described the general situation which he 
faced when he took charge of the government in 1661. " Everything 
was quiet everywhere," he writes in his memoirs, "no, movement nor 
semblance of movement anywhere in the kingdom that could inter- 
rupt or hamper my plans. Peace was established with my neighbors 
probably for as long a time as I should myself desire." 

He thus saw himself master at home and able to give peace or war 

to Europe, whichever he might prefer. That he would choose war 

was the most certain thing in the world. In the first place 

Louis 

warlike war was regarded as a fixed and permanent factor of civilization 

ambitions ^^ ^^len constituted. If it ceased for a moment, it was ex- 
pected to reappear, just as bad weather was expected to follow 
good. Princes considered war a natural function of royalty. In 
the second place Louis' imagination was absorbed in the achieve- 
ment of his own glory, and the greatest glory, as history showed, 
had always fallen to the lot of the world's warriors and conquerors, 
its Alexanders, Ccesars, Charlemagnes. Louis intended to play a 
great historic role, to be a great actor upon the human stage. " The 
praise of history," he said, "is something exquisite." He would 
show the world that "there was still a King on earth." "To have' 
a crown is not everything, one must know how to wear it," was 
another of his opinions. Holding such traditional views, it is not 
surprising that Louis was almost continually at war for over half a 
century, and that he sought domination of Europe by arms. 

He had an able minister of war in Lou vols (16-vwa'), a man who 
loved "order" and "system" and who displayed prodigious activity, 
Louvoisand ^ sense for detail and a capacity for general views, in his 
Vauban great work of perfecting the army and making it the most 

powerful Europe had yet seen. Louis also had in Vauban (v6-boh') 
a great military engineer, who revolutionized the art of attacking 
and defending fortified positions. Vauban calculated everything 
nicely and accurately, the time in the trenches, the angle of fire, 
the hour for the assault, the moment for capitulation so that some- 
times ladies were invited to witness the surrender and were not kept 
waiting. Sieges were begun and ended to an accompaniment of 
violins. A siege by Vauban was a work of art, a beautiful, methodi- 
cal, systematic operation. He perfected the art of defense also. 



LOUIS THE FOURTEENTH 



29 




Louis XIV after G. de la Haye 
From Le Grand Steele by Emile Bourgeois. 



30 



FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 



Louis 
attacks 
the Spanish 
Netherlands 
(1667) 



Expressions came into use to indicate his mastery: "A town be- 
sieged by Vauban is a town taken" ; "A town defended by Vauban 
is an impregnable town." Vauban constructed along the exposed 
frontiers a first and' second line of fortifications which really closed 
France and which, toward the end of the reign, sufficed to check and 
stop the invasion of the country. 

WARS AGAINST SPAIN AND HOLLAND 

With such aids as Louvois and Vauban and with an able body of 
commanders, of whom Turenne (tii-ren') and Conde (con-da') were 

the chief, Louis could go far — and he did, although his armies 

would seem to us very 

small, probably never 

more than 200,000 

men. In the spring 
of 1667, the international 
situation proving propitious 
and a satisfactory pretext 
being forthcoming, Louis 
suddenly attacked Spain, 
an old enemy and now a 
mediocre opponent. The 
attack was made upon the 
Spanish Netherlands, that 
is, upon what we know as 
Belgium. Louis sent to 
Madrid a "Treatise" on the 
rights of the French Queen 
to these provinces, a book of 
270 quarto pages. Without 
waiting for a reply he en- 
tered Flanders. The south- 
ern part of the Netherlands was speedily overrun, one town falling 
after another. The campaign was a short one, and remarkably 
successful. There was no serious resistance. 

But this rapid success alarmed Europe. The Dutch, particularly,, 
became greatly excited, fearing, as the French minister wrote home, 
lest their own republic should be lost within two years and Holland 
should merely become "a maritime province of France." They 




Vauban 

From an original picture by Lebrun in the 
War Office at Paris. 



WAR WITH HOLLAND 31 

persuaded England and Sweden to enter an alliance against Louis. 
This Triple Alliance and its offer of mediation, accompanied by a 
threat of war if not accepted, cut Louis "to the quick." a Triple 
But he called "prudence to his support," to use his phrase, ^^^^?,^ 
and, deciding that he had neither the number of troops England, 
necessary nor allies of the requisite quality, he accepted the ^'"^ Sweden 
mediation. The result was the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (aks-la- 
sha-pel') (1668), a treaty between France and Spain, by which Louis 
abandoned his sweeping pretensions to the Spanish Netherlands, but 
retained about a dozen of the towns he had conquered. Louis thus 
pushed back his frontiers where, as he said, they were "a little 
close." His entrance into his new cities was a dazzling event, car- 
riages of gold and crystal, saddle cloths embroidered in gold, courtiers 
blazing with diamonds, ladies bright with silks and plumes and 
laces. A Frenchman who witnessed the scene wrote that "all that 
is known of the magnificence of Solomon and the grandeur of the 
King of Persia is not to be compared with the pomp that sur- 
rounded the King on this trip." 

But, despite appearances, the King of France was in anything but 
an agreeable mood. He had been blocked by Holland, and he 
knew it. "Cut to the quick," as he said, by this insolent and . • 
ungrateful people, and irritated particularly by a medal struck angry at 
in Holland and representing "Joshua arresting the Sun in *^^ "^"^ 
his Course," Louis resolved to annihilate that country. He went 
about this project with his accustomed deliberation and sagacity. 
He spent four years in preparation, diplomatic and military. He 
built up an imposing alliance to cooperate with him, and he broke 
up the Triple Alliance, by winning England and Sweden away. 
Thus he completely isolated Holland. Then he fell upon her like a 
thunderbolt. 

Louis did not deign formally to declare war. He merely an- 
nounced it, April 6, 1672, by a placard in which he attributed it 
to the "little satisfaction" he had found in the Dutch States- warwith 
General. His campaign was a series of easy and stunning Holland 
triumphs. He besieged four towns at one and the same time and 
the four fell, in fact, in four days (June 4-7, 1672). Utrecht 
(u'-trekt) also was captured. Holland was panic-stricken. Am- 
sterdam thought itself lost, the enemy being at the gates. One 
last resource the Dutch had, their dikes. These they now cut and 



32 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 

the country all around was inundated. Amsterdam became an 
island of the Zuyder Zee. 

Holland thus gained time for negotiations and, under the resolute 
leadership of William of Orange, she built up an imposing alliance 
against Louis. The theater of operations was thereby enlarged 
and Louis was consequently obliged to scatter his efforts. The war, 
begun in so triumphal a manner, dragged on for several years, but 
slowed down and threatened to approach a standstill. The advan- 
tage which the French enjoyed at the outset was lost by this dividing 
of their forces. Holland was terribly ravaged, and unexampled 
sieverities of treatment were meted out to her in the most systematic 
manner. "Necessity knows no law," said Louis, thus anticipating 
a phrase made famous in our own unhappy day. But Holland 
held out, and the alarm of other countries at the menace which 
threatened all from France increased. The result was that peace 
was finally made at Nimwegen (nim'-wa-gen) (1678). Louis 
Nimwegen was willing to stop the war if he could show a string of advan- 
^^^"^^^ tageous annexations. As the powers, for one reason or another, 

had had enough of fighting, they were ready to compromise. Once 
more Spain was selected to pay the piper. She was forced to re- 
linquish Franche-Comte (frohsh-koh-ta') to France and also certain 
additional towns in the Netherlands. Louis had announced the 
terms he would accept. Although he had not accomplished what 
he had set out to, nevertheless he had kept the initiative up to the 
end, and he was resolved to show that he still held the whip hand. 
The war had been fought on foreign soil. The King of France had 
held a European coalition at bay. He had negotiated as master, 
not as equal. And he had annexed valuable territory. 

Louis XIV thus appeared in 1679 as the conqueror of Europe. 

Since he had taken control of the government he had added to 

France, Dunkirk, Franche-Comte, and half of Flanders, and 

Louis ^ peace had just been made, practically according to the terms 

Great " he had laid down. The City of Paris expressed public opinion 

when it officially bestowed upon him the title of "Great." 

Nevertheless the King was not as satisfied as he appeared to be. 

He had had to abate much from his hopes of 1672. Holland, which 

he had intended to destroy, was still intact, was, indeed, very much 

alive. Louis was fully conscious that he had maintained himself 

against a multitude of enemies and yet he felt that the work was of 



FRANCE ANNEXES STRASBURG 




34 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 

an unfinished character. He showed his real feehng by disgracing 
his minister of foreign affairs, as if it were he who had been responsible 
for what, after all, had been a failure. 

To cover up his partial discomfiture and to aggrandize his states 
in time of peace as in time of war, Louis now instituted certain 
so-called "Chambers of Reunion," or packed courts, whose 
aggressions duty it was to determine just how much territory the King 
in time of France had acquired under the terms of various treaties, 

peace including those of Nimwegen and Westphalia. Some of the 

phrases used in those treaties were vague or elastic. To the clauses 
ceding certain places, there had been added such words as "and 
their bailiwicks, territories, domains, seigniories, dependencies, and 
annexes." The duty of the "Chambers" was to determine just 
what was included in the case of each cession. While the process 
pretended to be judicial, no opportunity for legal defense was given 
to the persons or powers threatened with dispossession. The new 
policy speedily yielded rich results. Thus, in September, 1679, the 
Chamber of Besangon "reunited" to France eighty villages declared 
to be dependencies of the County of Montbeliard, and, in August, 
1680, all the rest of the county. In the same way, in a time of 
peace, extensive annexations were made in Alsace, leaving prac- 
tically only one important place untouched, Strasburg. In Septem- 
ber, 1 68 1, that city was "reunited" outright, without legal formality, 
and in the following month the King entered it in a gilded coach, 
drawn by eight horses. Three years later the Emperor signed 
a treaty recognizing these transfers. Louis' policy of annexation 
was apparently as successful in times of peace as in times of war. 

These continued aggressions aroused the apprehensions of Europe 
again and a new coalition against Louis began to form. This was 
hastened by an act which Louis committed at home, and which 
showed the same arrogant disregard of all established rights ; namely, 
his persecution of the Protestants. 

LOUIS XIV AND THE PROTESTANTS 

Since Henry IV had issued the Edict of Nantes (nants) in 1598 

Th Edict ^^^ position of the Protestants, or Huguenots, of France 

of Nantes seemed reasonably satisfactory. They enjoyed many essen- 

^^^'^^ tial religious and civil rights, and they prospered greatly. 

They were richer, man for man, than the Catholics, and they showed 



THE EDICT OF NANTES 35 

great vigor in many lines of activity, a vigor and energy partly 
derived, no doubt, from the fighting stock from which they came. 
There were, perhaps, a million and a half of them out of a total 
population of nineteen million. 

Louis XIV showed, from the beginning, his dislike of the Protes- 
tants and of Protestantism. In his nature there was no spirit of 
toleration. He was offended by the presence in the king- 
dom of men who differed from him in opinion. He believed policy 
that there ought to be uniformity and unity in the religious °^ ^"?' 
life of France, that the existence of different religions was 
a disfigurement of the state. For many years, however, the Edict 
of Nantes continued to stand, only now it was interpreted and en- 
forced as narrowly and as rigorously as possible, so that the liberties 
granted were considerably reduced in practice. Beyond the strict 
letter of the law, no favors of any kind. This policy, however, 
soon gave way to one of partial and sporadic attack, which was 
not very conspicuous, but which, although arousing no great clamor, 
operated incessantly and effectively in undermining the rights and 
the security of this religious minority. That it was the highest 
duty of the King to extirpate heresy in the realm was the burden 
of many sermons and ecclesiastical utterances. Gradually more 
serious blows began to be rained upon the heads of the devoted 

Huguenots. Ways were found or invented of destroying , . , , 

, , 1 , 1 T , • 1 • Louis policy 

many of the churches they had built. In the smgle provmce of sup- 

of Poitou (pua-to') question was raised about 74 temples, and, ^'^^^tJl^^igj^ 

as a result, 64 of them were destroyed. Finally in 1679 the 

government began to adopt more rigorous measures, and for six 

years a relentless, comprehensive plan of bribery, intimidation, and 

general oppression was followed, culminating in a pitiless campaign 

to force the conversion of the Protestants to Catholicism. One 

method, forever infamous, was the quartering upon Protestant 

families of rough and licentious soldiers or dragoons. So great was 

the terror inspired by these dragonnades, as they were called, that, 

rather than endure them entire communities announced their 

"conversion," 22,000 in Beam (ba-ar'), 60,000 in the district of 

Bordeaux, within a space of two weeks. Revocation 

Finally, in 1685, Louis formally revoked the Edict of ^dict 

Nantes, which had been in force for eighty-seven years. He of Nantes 

ordered the demolition of all Protestant churches, the closing of 



36 



FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 



Protestant schools, the baptism by Cathohc priests of all children 
who should be born to Protestants, the banishment of all Huguenot 
ministers. 

The King's act received almost universal applause. La Fontaine, 
Madame de Sevigne, Bossuet, extolled the pious achievement. In 
judging this act we must remember that tolerance was a virtue 
almost unknown in the seventeenth century, in many Protestant 




Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, 16S5 
From an old print, reproduced in Erdmannsdorfer's Deutsche Geschichle von 164S-1740. 

lands, as in Catholic. Nevertheless by it France retrograded a 

century. And she failed in her attempt to stamp out heresy, for 

the Huguenots managed to exist under the odious persecution. 

„„ , / France, by this act, not only sacrificed her moral leadership, 

£>Cect or ' ■' 

revocation but she lost perhaps a quarter of a million of her most ener- 

in France ^^^j^ ^^^ vigorous people, for the Huguenots emigrated in 

large numbers to England, Holland, Brandenburg, America, carrying 

with them their devotion to their religion, their intelligence and 



CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XIV 37 

industry, and their hatred of Louis XIV. All this force went to 
strengthen foreign countries, which were destined to be the enemies 
of France. In 1697 twenty-five per cent of the population of Berlin 
consisted of Huguenot refugees. 

The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes exasperated the Protes- 
tants in every country, reenforcing at the same time the animosity 
aroused by the previous actions of the King. It had much to 
do with the overthrow of James II of England and the sum- " °^^" 
moning by the English Parliament of William of Orange to the 
throne, which meant the close union of Great Britain and Holland 
henceforth in opposition to France. 

CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XIV 

Not only Louis' policy, but also his personality, profoundly im- 
pressed the Europe of his day. Louis XIV was the perfect pattern 
of a prince. He was twenty-two years old when he took his position 
easily, naturally, quite to the manner born, in the very center 
of the stage. He had come to the throne in 1643, but, being ^^ p^mce 
only a child, the direction of affairs had lain in other hands, par- 
ticularly in those of Mazarin (maz'-a-rin), a diplomatist and states- 
man trained in the school of Richelieu (resh-lye'). But upon the 
death of Mazarin in 1661 Louis resolved to be king in fact as well 
as in name. He had a commanding presence in which grace and 
dignity and seriousness were so happily combined that he seemed 
taller than he was, for he was only of medium height. As a youth 
he was fond of novels and of poetry, was proficient in tournaments, 
ran well, was an excellent dancer, knew how to take his part in 
theatricals and was not averse to masquerades and jokes. The young 
lords and ladies who shared his pleasures had, however, the taste 
or the discretion never to overstep the mark, never to cross the 
awful line that separated friendliness from familiarity. 

Louis enjoyed being King. The profession was one that pleased 
him thoroughly and he did not conceal his delight in i{. He himself 
wrote some reflections on it, one of which was that " the trade Louis 
of King is grand, noble, delightful." But Louis did not make the King 
the mistake of thinking it an easy trade. He was careful to study 
its requirements and conscientious in discharging its duties. He 
did not plunge ahead recklessly, making important decisions without 
reflection. He was prudent, circumspect, not trusting to, nor 



38 



FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 




The Louvre and the Tuileries 
From an old print, reproduced in Philippson's Das ZeitaUer Ludwigs XIV . 



EDUCATION OF LOUIS XIV 39 

expecting, any sudden illumination from on high. He took kingship 
seriously, both on its practical and its decorative, its prosaic and its 
symbolical, sides. He was a hard, habitual, methodical worker, 
shirking nothing, ever eager to learn. He presided over interminable 
councils, granted innumerable interviews, listened attentively to 
long and tedious reports, interrogated vigorously his secretaries, 
his generals, his advisers, and then weighed their words. And 
every day he gave the same close attention to the pleasures and 
diversions of the court as to great policies of state, and, while about 
him every one seemed active and agitated, he alone seemed calm. 
For fifty years, despite more or less bad health, stomach trouble, and 
acute headaches, due, no doubt, to some extent to his enormous 
eating and to bad teeth, Louis kept up this regimen of work, method- 
ical, without haste and without rest, always at the same tasks at 
the same hours. "With an almanac and a watch you could tell 
three hundred leagues away just what he was doing," wrote Saint 
Simon. 

This man, who thus showed exemplary and steadfast application 
to his business, was, however, of only ordinary ability, of onl}- ordinary 
intelligence. Louis' general education had been poor. He had His * 
learned little from his tutors and sometimes he himself felt education 
his deficiencies. "It is bitterly humiliating," he once wrote con- 
cerning his lack of knowledge of history, "to be ignorant of things 
which every one else knows." His military education, however, 
resulted in his being an excellent rider, able to sit his saddle fifteen 
hours running, if necessary, in making him a fearless soldier, and in 
giving him a respectable knowledge of the organization of an army 
and of the conduct of a campaign. In diplomacy he had had his 
training at the hands of Mazarin, who was certainly broken to all 
the intrigues of European politics, who, though a Cardinal of the 
Church, was not innocent of the ways of this world and whose 
political principles were not marked by any excessive austerity. 
Mazarin had for many years managed the diplomatic affairs . ... 
of France with subtlety and success, guiding the state through pupil of 
many a raging storm, past many a murderous reef, and was ^^^n"* 
in a position to give his princely pupil much invaluable- instruction. 
He inoculated him with maxims of very doubtful ethical qifality. 
One of these, which Louis learned thoroughly and took well to heart, 
was that a ruler must be ready to sacrifice every scruple, even per- 



40 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 

sonal honor, for the advantage of the state ; another was that every 
man can be bought and that, therefore, a ruler should seek to know 
every man's price ; another was that distrust of every human being ■ 
is the beginning of all wisdom for a monarch. I 

Under such instruction Louis learned to dissimulate and lie "even 
perfidiously and sometimes odiously." His state of mind was one 
of constant suspicion of those about him, and his problem was how to 
penetrate through the mask to the rogue or scoundrel behind. 
Mazarin had that high satisfaction that sometimes comes to the 
teacher, the knowledge that his pupil has thoroughly assimilated the 
lesson imparted. Mazarin admired the progress, writing, "The 
King is growing in wisdom and dissimulation" ; and he took what 
he considered a pardonable pride in hearing one day the story of 
how King Louis, aged fifteen, had deceived both a Cardinal and a 
Jesuit at one and the same moment ! 

Such were some of the traits of character, such the training of the 

man who was destined to give his name to his age, who took the 

„. . . , sun as his emblem, sole source of light and life, who was known 

His ideal ° ' 

absolute as the Sun-King, and whose pride was as the pride of the 

monarchy pharaohs. When -Louis XIV mounted the throne, as actual 
ruler, he had a very definite theory of the part a monarch should play 
in the life of a nation, a theory which he was able to realize in practice 
with singular completeness. We find his ideal expressed in his own 
Memoirs in these words: "All eyes are fixed upon him alone; to 
him alone are all desires directed ; he alone receives every mark of 
homage, he alone is the object of every hope. Nothing is attempted, 
nothing is expected, nothing done, save through him alone. His 
gracious favors are regarded as the sole source of happiness ; no one 
believes it possible to mount higher save as he comes nearer to his 
person, to his esteem. AH else is vanity." 

THE CREATOR OF VERSAILLES 

One of the sins to which Louis XIV confessed when dying was his 

excessive passion for building. Kings have generally been inclined 

to be builders, to leave imposing memorials of their reigns in works 

of architecture, but no King of France ever built so much as 

Versailles " 

his great Louis XIV. His Supreme and remarkable achievement was 

P"**® the creation of the palace of Versailles (ver-salz'), which some 

of his ecclesiastical flatterers compared with the creation of the 



THE CREATION OF VERSAILLES 



41 




1 



42 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 



world, knowing more or less about that professionally. It was the 
most monumental royal residence in Europe. Begun in 1661, it 
was a quarter of a century in building. Emanating from Louis' 
own thought, it was his work, in inception, in development, in 
completion. Nothing that he did in his long life absorbed so com- 
pletely his attention or gave him such constant and supreme satis- 
faction. He overruled his architects repeatedly and ordered other- 
wise. Not only the building but its interior decoration proceeded 
year after year under the watchful, critical eye of the King. Every 
marble, every fresco, everj^ chandelier had to pass the royal censor- 
ship. Every art and artist in France was called upon for contribu- 
tions to the stupendous whole. The result was such a palace as 
the world had never seen. Resplendent with gold and marble, 
glittering with mirrors, adorned with paintings, tapestries, medal- 
lions, depicting the history of the reign, the triumphs of the King, 
the whole set in the midst of a wonderful park, itself a work of art, 
with endless lawns, avenues, vistas, terraces, with lakes, fountains, 
groves, peopled with bronze and marble statues, with shrubbery cut 
and kept in geometrical forms, all harmoniously and elaborately 
combined, — the palace of Versailles, when completed, amazed the 
world by its splendor. What was more, it satisfied the King. 
Here he lived and moved and had his being. Here lived the court, 
also, consisting of the great nobles whom Louis had cured of their 
war-like and independent habits, and whom he had converted into 
social satellites and parasites. Versailles was the paradise of the 
spoiled children of fortune. The spectacle offered by this animated, 
aesthetic, artificial society was rare and curious. Versailles was 
the .coronation and the apotheosis of the pride of one man. And no 
one of all the gilded throng that crowded the salons and terraces 
enjoyed Versailles as much as did the central figure of the pageant. 
Such was the setting, such the rich and spacious background, 
against which the comedy and tragedy of absolute monarchy in the 
Unhappy ^^^ °^ ^^^ perfection was played. For, in truth, there was 

effects of tragedy as well as comedy in this creation of a capital that 
S Vers"aS ^^^^ ^^^ ^"^^'^ °^ ^^'^^>' °^her king in Christendom. All this 
was tremendously expensive, and France really existed for 
other things than simply the aesthetic satisfaction of Louis XIV. 
The building of Versailles threw the carefully studied financial 
system of Colbert (kol-bar'), the King's tireless and intelligent 



A ROYAL RESIDENCE 



43 




44 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 

finance minister, clean out of plumb, with far-reaching consequences. 
Also it meant the withdrawal of the King and nobles away from the 
real life of France into the factitious life of a fabulous chateau and 
of a town made to order by royal decree. Louis was separated from 
the nation. He lived in splendor apart, continually surrounded by 
courtiers, continually breathing the heavy and heady incense of 
adulation. "The founding of Versailles," says a distinguished 
French historian, "had more considerable and graver consequences 
than any war that Louis fought or than all his wars together." Ver- 
sailles represents a moment in French history, that of monarchy 
unapproachable, and unapproached elsewhere. Nothing could be 
added to that particular conception. 

LOUIS' ENCOURAGEMENT OF ART AND LETTERS 

"The love of glory takes precedence over everything else in my 
soul," Louis admits with candor. It was unfortunate both for him 
and for France and for Europe that in his mind glory was largely 
synonymous with success in war. 

The glory of the lawmaker, the glory of the Meecenas under 
whose inspiration flourish arts and sciences and letters and all 
civilizing agencies Louis did not despise, far from it, but glory so 
acquired was in his opinion of an inferior quality. And in this 
opinion artists, scientists, and men of letters themselves concurred, 
lavishing their finest talent upon the commemoration of his achieve- 
ments in arms. Louis desired to make his reign memorable in every 
line of activity, and great was his success, aided, studied, and secured, 
as it was, by his enlightened and energetic minister, Colbert, whose 
eye was everywhere, whose powers of work were so unremitting and 
so concentrated that he was able to fill the equivalent of a dozen 
ministries of to-day, and to touch the national life at very many 
points. 

Colbert conceived, for instance, the project of an elaborate investi- 
gation and codification of the laws, the elimination of all confusion 
Colbert and ^^^ contradictions from them, and he promised the King the 
codification "benediction of the world" if he would introduce reason where 
aws ^Y[ ^^s unreason, clarity where all was obscurity, if, in. short, 
he would create "a complete and perfect body" of law. As a matter 
of fact during the reign several elaborate ordinances were issued 
which considerably improved the situation and rendered easier 



AUGUSTAN AGE OF FRENCH LITERATURE 45 



and sciences 



the later and more famous codifications carried through by 
Napoleon. 

Colbert also sought to direct and stimulate the intellectual and 
artistic life of France toward the same end, the exaltation and the 
glory of the King, which, in his opinion,- was the only worthy Encourage- 
end of Frenchmen in every branch of human endeavor. By ment of arts 
the careful encouragement of academies of painting, sculpture, 
architecture, music, and literature, by helping scientists of every 
kind, mathematicians, physi- 
cists, chemists, astronomers, 
he sought to enrich and 
refine the civilization, the 
culture and learning and 
taste of France, and to 
identify the person and the 
prestige of the King with all 
these high exploits. Louis 
entered sympathetically into 
all these plans of his minis- 
ter. He knew that when 
men spoke of the Augustan 
age they meant that Augus- 
tus had seen, in his day, 
what Louis intended pos- 
terity should see in his, 
namely, that the promotion 
and encouragement of arts 
and letters is one of the 
highest and most enduring distinctions of a great prince.- 

In one department of creative art did this reign shine with peculiar 
brilliancy. The French literature of the seventeenth century has 
a long roll of distinguished names, and the larger number of prench 
them belong in the second half of that century : Moliere literature 
(mo-lyar'), incomparable satirist of men and manners, whose seventeenth 
thirty comedies include several which are among the treasures century 
of the French theater; Racine (ra-sen'), sincere and unaffected 
interpreter of great passions and great experiences, whose tragedies 
are among the most eloquent and most finished examples of French 
verse; La Fontaine (la fon-tan'), whose Fables, grave or gay, reveal 




CULBERT 



46 



FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 



a delicate art and grace, placed at the service of a humane and 
kindly philosophy; Madame de Sevigne (sa-ven-ya'), whose Letters 
are an invaluable panorama of the life of her time, of court life, of 

life in Paris, of country life ; 
Bossuet (bo-sii-a'), the majes- 
tic, sonorous pulpit orator, 
whose sermons are examples 
of the eloquence and the 
dignified prose of a stately 
period of French history ; 
Boileau, poet and founder of 
literary criticism ; and La 
Bruyere (la brii-yar'), essayist 
and moralist, with a gift for 
sarcastic and vivid portrait- 
ure. These are not all of the 
men of letters whose work 
honored the reign of the proud 
King and gave prestige to the 
French language and French 
literature abroad. Indeed, 
owing to this illustrious group 
of writers the language of 
France started on its con- 
quest of cultivated people everywhere and ultimately came to 
occupy in the modern world the position which Greek had occupied 
in the ancient. 




Portrait of Moliere 



INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 

But Louis' supreme interest, his heart of hearts, was not in this 

field of literary and artistic achievement. Nor was it in all that 

varied activity in material things associated with the name of 

Encourage- -^ ° 

ment of Colbert, activity directed toward the creation of sound and 

in ustry prosperous national finances, toward the founding and promo- 

tion of colonial establishments, toward the development of industries 
and commerce, toward the balanced and comprehensive exploitation 
of the wonderful natural resources of France. To all of this Colbert 
gave himself body and soul for more than twenty years, and the 
wealth and economic power of France in the world were greatly 



THE SPANISH SUCCESSION 47 

furthered by his activity. The King gave support, sometimes 
vigorous, sometimes languid, to the carefully studied, wide-ranging 
projects of his diligent and strenuous minister, whose consuming 
ambition was to make France the richest country in the world. 
But Louis' heart was elsewhere, unfortunately for France. As we 
have seen, his real interest was war. 

THE LAST THIRTY YEARS OF LOUIS' REIGN 

Louis' reign falls into two divisions which are quite sharply dis- 
tinguished from each other. Up to the time of his revocation of the 
Edict of Nantes he was greatly successful. His wars and his annexa- 
tions caused his fame to spread far and wide throughout the world. 
He continued to reign for thirty years longer, but these were His 
years of increasing difificulty for France, and of a growing and '^*^^'' ^^^^ 
ominous national distress. He had made his country thoroughly 
hated and feared abroad. He committed other aggressions and 
was engaged in other wars : that of the so-called League of Augs- 
burg (agz'-berg) which dragged on for nearly a decade from 1688 
to 1697, during which France stood alone against Europe and from 
which she gained nothing ; and particularly that of the Spanish 
Succession, which lasted from 1701 to 1713, a conflict more wide- 
spread than even the Thirty Years' War. This conflict was a struggle 
for the spoils of the immense Spanish Empire, European and Ameri- 
can, the old roj^al house of Spain having died out. England, Hol- 
land, France, the Empire, and other countries participated. All 
the more important battles went against the French, a new and a 
humiliating experience for the Grand Monarch. Marlborough, 
with his victories of Blenheim (blen'-im) and Malplaquet (mal- 
pla-ka'), and Prince Eugene of Austria, were the heroes of the war. 
And out of it England acquired the most — Gibraltar and Minorca 
from Spain, and Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and the Hudson Bay 
region from France, thus beginning the expulsion of France from 
North America. Austria gained the Spanish Netherlands, which were 
henceforth called the Austrian Netherlands ; and she also gained 
important territories in Italy — Milan and Naples. France only 
gained the recognition of a grandson of Louis XIV as King of Spain, 
Philip V, but she was forced to agree that France and Spain should 
never be united. 

Louis had thus lived to taste the bitterness of defeat. His last 



48 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV 

years were years of gloom. He lost his son and his grandson, and 
when he died in 17 15 he left his kingdom to his great-grandson, a 
The end of child of five. And to this child he left a troubled inheritance, 
the reign ^ country whosc population had fallen from nineteen million 
to seventeen, a state exhausted, impoverished, and approaching 
bankruptcy, a people in distress and misery, already murmuring 
faint thoughts of revolution, all as a result of a selfish and over- 
weening ambition. 

Saint Simon says that when his subjects heard of the death of 
Louis XIV they "trembled with joy" and "thanked God for their 
deliverance." 

"The experiment of Absolute Monarchy," comments a recent 
writer, "had been tried, and had failed." 

REFERENCES 

Adams, G. B., The Growth of the French Nation, Chap. XIII. 

DucLAUx, Short History of France, pp. 132-151. 

Wakeman, The Ascendancy of France, Chaps. IX-XI, XIV-XV. 

Perkins, France under the Regency, Chaps. V-IX. 

RoBEsrsoN, Readings in European History, Vol. II, Chap. XXXI. 



V 



A/"^ 



CHAPTER III 
EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

The reign of Louis XIV has carried us well into the eighteenth 
century, to which, indeed, it was a natural introduction. It was 
followed by another long reign, that of Louis XV, which lasted from 
17 15 to 1774, a reign in which absolute monarchy, as developed so 
completely and so brilliantly under the Grand Monarch, continued 
to function in France, arousing, as the century wore on, greater 
and greater discontent among the people of that country until they 
finall}' rose in insurrection and swept the whole system away in 
the famous French Revolution, ending tragically the career of 
Louis' successor, Louis XVI. 

But France, though the leading country on the continent of 
Europe all through this period, was, after all, only one of the numer- 
ous actors upon the historic stage. The policies and purposes 
of other nations, the nature of their problems, the trend of their 
development, were necessarily of the greatest significance in shaping 
and determining the collective life of Europe and must be examined 
in any survey of the times, however brief. The destinies of all 
the European nations are closely interlocked. The conduct of one 
reacts upon the others. The incessant interplay of all these diverse 
forces makes European history a very complicated subject, but also, 
for that very reason, a most instructive one. 

What was Europe like in the eighteenth century ? 

One thing, at least, it was not : it was not a unity. There were 
states of every size and shape and with every form of government. 
The States of the Church were theocratic ; capricious and cruel Europe in 
despotism prevailed in Turkey ; absolute monarchy in Russia, ^'^s 
Austria, France, Prussia ; constitutional monarchy in England ; 
while there were various kinds of so-called republics — federal 
republics in Holland and Switzerland," a republic whose head was an 
elective king in Poland, aristocratic republics in Venice and Genoa 
and in the free cities of the Holy Roman Empire. 

49 



50 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

ENGLAND AND PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT 

Of these states the one that was to be the most persistent enemy 
of France and of French ideas throughout this period was England, 
a commercial and colonial empire of the first importance. This 
empire, of long, slow growth, passed through many highly sig- 
centuryin nificant experiences during the eighteenth century. Indeed 
English ^i-j^^ century is one of the most momentous in English history, 

rendered forever memorable by three great series of events 
which in important respects transformed the national life of England 
and her international relations, giving th m the character and 
tendency which have been theirs ever since. These three streams 
of tendency or lines of evolution out of which the modern power of 
Britain has emerged were : the acquisition of what are still the most 
valuable parts of her colonial empire, Canada and India ; the estab- 
lishment of the parliamentary system of government, that is, govern- 
ment of the nation by its representatives, not by its royal house, the 
undoubted supremacy of Parliament over the Crown ; and the begin- 
nings of what is called the Industrial Revolution, that is, of the 
modern factory system of production on a vast scale which during 
the course of the nineteenth century made England easily the chief 
industrial nation of the world. 

The evolution of the parliamentary system of government had, 

of course, been long in progress but it was immensely furthered by 

the advent in 17 14 of a new royal dynasty, the House of Han- 

Accession of _ / ^ ... 

the House of ovcr, still at this hour the reigning family, although as a result 
Hanover ^£ ^-j^^ European War the title has been changed by proclama- 

tion of July 17, 1917, to that of the House of Windsor. The struggle 
between Crown and Parliament, which had been long proceeding and 
had become tense and violent, as we have seen, in the seventeenth 
century in connection with the attempts of the Stuart kings to make 
the monarchy all-powerful and supreme, ended finally in the eight- 
eenth century with the victory of Parliament and the establishment 
of what is known as the parliamentary or cabinet system of govern- 
ment, a system destined in the nineteenth century to be widely 
adopted by other nations. 

In 1688 Parliament, by mere legislative act had altered the line 
of succession by passing over the direct, legitimate claimant because 
he was a Catholic, and by calling to the throne William and Mary 



ACCESSION OF THE HOUSE OF HANOVER 51 

because they were Protestants, but in so doing it did not pass outside 
the House of Stuart. Queen Anne, who succeeded WilUam and who 
ruled from 1701 to 17 14, was a Stuart. But in 1701 Parhament 
again determined the hne of succession by again passing over the 
legitimate claimant because he was a Catholic and by providing 
that in case Queen Anne should die without direct heirs, as she did, 
the throne should pass to George, Elector of Hanover, and the 
reason for this action was the same as for that of 1688, namely be- 
::ause England was resolved upon having a Protestant as king. 
Thus the older branch of the royal family was set aside, and a 
younger or collateral branch was put in its place. This was a plain 
defiance of the ordinary rules of descent which generally underlie 
the monarchical system everywhere. It showed that the will of 
Parliament was superior to the monarchical principle, that, in a way, 
the monarchy was elective. Still other important consequences 
followed from this act. 

George I, at the time of his accession to the English throne in 17 14 
fifty-four years of age, was a German. He continued to be a German 
prince, more concerned with his electorate of Hanover than xhe eariy^ 
with his new kingdom. He did not understand a word of Hanoverians 
English and, as his ministers were similarly ignorant of German, he 
was compelled to resort to a dubious Latin when he wished to com- 
municate with them. He was King from 1714 to 1727, and was 
followed by his son, George II, who ruled from 1727 to 1760 and who, 
though he knew English, spoke it badly and was far more interested 
in his petty German principality than in imperial Britain. 

The first two Georges, whose chief interest in England was the 
money they could get out of it, therefore alloweid their ministers to 
Darry on the government and they did not even attend the jje^ejo-j^g^x 
meetings of the ministers where questions of policy were of cabinet 
decided. For forty-six years this royal abstention continued, government 
The result was the establishment of a regime never seen before in any 
country. The royal power was no longer exercised by the King, but 
was exercised by his ministers, who, moreover, were members of 
Parliament. In other words, to use a phrase that has become 
famous, the King reigns but does not govern. Parliarpent really 
governs, through a committee of its members, the ministers. 

The ministers must have the support of the majority party in Par- 
liament, and during all this period they, as a matter of fact, relied 



52 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

upon the party of the Whigs. It had been the Whigs who had carried 
through the revolution of 1688 and who were committed to the 
The Whigs principle of the Umitation of the royal power in favor of the 
in power sovereignty of Parliament. As George I and George II owed 

their throne to this party, and as the adherents of the other great 
party, the Tory, were long supposed to be supporters of the discarded 
Stuarts, England entered upon a period of Whig rule, which steadily 
undermined the authority of the monarch. The Hanoverian kings 
owed their position as kings to the Whigs. They paid for their 
right to reign by the abandonment of the powers that had hitherto 
inhered in the monarch. 

The change that had come over their position did not escape the 
attention of the monarchs concerned. George II, compelled to 
accept ministers he detested, considered himself "aprisoner upon the 
throne." "Your ministers. Sire," said one of them to him, "are but 
the instruments of your government." George smiled and replied, 
"In this country the ministers are king." 

ENGLAND'S COLONIAL EXPANSION 

Besides the introduction of this unique form of government the 
other great achievement of the Whigs during this period was an 
extraordinary increase in the colonial possessions of England, 
the Seven the real launching of Britain upon her career as a world power. 
Years' War ^^ ^ great imperial state. This sudden, tremendous expansion 
was a result of the Seven Years' War, which raged from 1756 to 1763 
in every part of the world, in Europe, in America, in Asia, and on 
the sea. Many nations were involved and the struggle was highly 
complicated, but two phases of it stand out particularly and in 
high relief, the struggle between England and France, and the 
struggle between Prussia on the one hand and Austria, France, and 
Russia on the other. The Seven Years' War remains a mighty land- 
mark in the history of England and of Prussia, its two conspicuous 
beneficiaries. 

England found in William Pitt, later Earl of Chatham, an incom- 
parable leader, a great orator of a declamatory and theatrical type, 
an incorruptible statesman, a passionate patriot, a man instinct 
WiUiam itt ^^^^ energy, aglow with pride and confidence in the splen- 
dor of the destinies reserved for his country. Pitt infused his own 
energy, his irresistible driving power, into every branch of the public 



THE EARL OF CHATHAM 



53 



service. Head of the ministry from 1757 to 176 1, he aroused the na- 
tional sentiment to such a pitch, he directed the national efforts with 
such contagious and imperious confidence, that he turned a war that 
had begun badly into the 
most glorious and successful 
that England had ever fought. 
On the sea, in India, and in 
America, victory after victory 
over the French rewarded the 
nation's extraordinary efforts. 
Pitt boasted that he alone 
could save the country. Save 
it he surely did. He was the 
greatest of war ministers, im- 
parting his indomitable reso- 
lution to multitudes of others. 
No one, it was said, ever 
entered his office without com- 
ing out a braver man. His 
triumph was complete when 
Wolfe defeated Montcalm 
upon the Plains of Abra- 
ham. 

By the Peace of Paris, which 
closed this epochal struggle, 
England acquired from France 
disputed areas of Nova Scotia, all of Canada, and the region between 
the Alleghanies and the Mississippi River, and also acquired peace of 
Florida from Spain. From France, too, she snatched at the ^"'^ 
same time supremacy in India. Thus England had become a veri- 
table world-empire under the inspiring leadership of the "Great 
Commoner." Her horizons, her interests, had grown vastly more 
spacious by this rapid increase in military renown, in power, in terri- 
tory. She had mounted to higher influence in the world, and that, 
too, at the expense of her old historic enem}^ just across the Channel. 

GEORGE III AND PARLIAMENT 

But all this prestige and greatness were imperiled and gravely com- 
promised by the reign that had just begun. George III had, in 1760, 




William Pitt, Eael of Chatham 



54 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

come to the throne which he was not to leave until claimed by death 
sixty years later. "The name of George III," writes an English 
historian, "cannot be penned without a pang, can hardly be penned ■ 
Accession of witliout a cursc, such mischief was he fated to do the country." I 
George m Unlike his two predecessors, he was not a German, but 
was a son of England, had grown up in England and had been 
educated there, and on his accession, at the age of twenty-two, had 
announced in his most famous utterance that he "gloried in the name 
of Briton." But wisdom is no birthright, and George III was not des- 
tined to show forth in his life the saving grace of that quality. With 
many personal virtues, he was one of the least wise of monarchs and 
one of the most obstinate. 

|» His mother, a German princess, attached to all the despotic notions 

of her native land, had frequently said to him, "George, be a king." 

This maternal advice, that he should not follow the example 

George III of the first two Georges but should mix actively in public 

to the cabi- affairs, fell upon fruitful soil. George was resolved not only 

net system . ^ ° -^ 

to reign, but to govern in the good old monarchical way. 
This determination brought him into a sharp and momentous clash 
with the tendency and the desire of his age. The historical signifi- 
cance of George III lies in the fact that he was resolved to be the 
chief directing power in the state, that he challenged the system of 
government which gave that position to Parliament and its ministers, 
that he threw himself directly athwart the recent constitutional devel- 
opment, that he intended to break up the practices followed during 
the last two reigns and to rule personally as did the other sovereigns 
of the world. As the new system was insecurely established, his 
vigorous intervention brought on a crisis in which it nearly perished. 
George III, bent upon being king in fact as well as in name, did not 
formally oppose the cabinet system of government, but sought to 
Political make the cabinet a mere tool of his will, filling it with men who 

methods of would take orders from him, and aiding them in controlling 
^""^^^ Parliament by the use of various forms of bribery and in- 

fluence. It took several years to effect this real perversion of the 
cabinet system, but in the end the King absolutely controlled the 
ministry and the two chambers of Parliament. The Whigs, who 
since 1688 had dominated the monarch and had successfully asserted 
the predominance of Parliament, were gradually disrupted by the 
insidious royal policy, and were supplanted by the Tories, who were 



DISRUPTION OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 55 

ilways favorable to a strong kingship and who now entered upon a 
jeriod of supremacy which was to last until well into the eighteenth 
;entury. 

After ten years of this mining and sapping the King's ideas tri- 
miphed in the creation of a ministry which was completely sub- 
nissive to his will. This ministry, of which Lord North was the xhe ministry 
eading member, lasted twelve years, from 1770 to 1782. Lord of Lord North 
"^orth was a minister after the King's own heart. He never pre- 
ended to be the head of the government, but accepted and executed 
he King's wishes with the ready obedience of a lackey. The royal 
LUtocracy was scarcely veiled by the mere continuance of the outer 
orms of a free government. 

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION 

Having thus secured entire control of ministry and Parliament, 
jeorge III proceeded to lead the British Empire straight toward 
lestruction, to what Goldwin Smith has called "the most 
ragical disaster in English history." The King and his tools 
nitiated a policy which led swiftly and inevitably to civil war. 
^or the American Revolution was a civil war within the British 
empire. The King had his supporters both in England and in 
\,merica ; he had opponents both in America and England. Party 
livisions were much the same in the mother country and in the 
:olonies, Whigs versus Tories, the upholders of the principle of self- 
government against the upholders of the principle of the royal 
)rerogative. In this appalling crisis, not only was the independence 
)f America involved, but parliamentary government as worked out 
n England was also at stake. Had George III triumphed not only 
vould colonial liberties have disappeared, but the right of Parliament 
:o be predominant in the state at home would have vanished. The 
A'higs of England knew this well, and their leaders, Pitt, Fox, Burke, 
jloried in the victories of the rebellious colonists. 

The struggle for the fundamental rights of free men, for that was 
vhat the American Revolution signified for both America and Eng- 
and, was long doubtful. France now took her revenge for the paii of Lord 
lumiliations of the Seven Years' War by aiding the thirteen ^"""^^ 
■olonies, hoping thus to humble her arrogant neighbor, grown so great 
It her expense. It was the disasters of the American War that saved 
he parliamentary system of government for England by rendering 



56 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

the King unpopular, because disgracefully unsuccessful. In 1782 
Lord North and all his colleagues resigned. This was the first time 
that an entire ministry had been overthrown. 

George the Third's attempt to be master in the state had failed and 

although the full consequences of his defeat did not appear for some 

. . time, nevertheless they were decisive for the future of England. 

of the The king "might henceforth reign, but he was not to govern. 

American ^q gg^ ^]^jg cardinal principle of free government under monarch - 

Revolution ° r- r- & 

ical forms established, an empire was disrupted. From that 
disruption flowed two mighty consequences. The principles of 
republican government gained a field for development in the New 
World, and those of constitutional or limited monarchy a field in 
one of the famous countries of the Old. These two types of govern- 
ment have since exerted a powerful and an increasing influence 
upon other peoples desirous of controlling their own destinies. Their 
importance as models worthy of imitation has not yet been exhausted. 
But the disaster of the American War was so great that the immedi- 
ate efifect was a decided impairment of England's prestige. It is a 
En land's curious fact that after that she was considered by most of the 
loss of rulers of Europe a decaying nation. She had lost her most 

pres ige valuable colonies in America. The notion was prevalent 

that her successes in the Seven Years' War had not been due to her 
own ability but to the incapacity of Louis XV, whereas they had been 
due to both. The idea that it was possible to destroy England was 
current in France, the idea that her empire was really a phantom 
empire which would disappear at the first hostile touch, that India 
could be detached far more easily than the thirteen colonies had been. 
It was considered that as she had grown rich she had lost her virility 
and energy and was undermined by luxury and sloth. At the same 
time, although in flagrant contradiction to the sentiments just 
described, there was a vague yet genuine fear of her. Though she 
had received so many blows, yet she had herself in the past given so 
many to her rivals and especially to France that they did well to 
have a lurking suspicion after all as to her entire decadence. The 
rivalry, centuries old, of France and England, was one of the chief 
elements of the general European situation. It had shown no signs 
„ , ^ J of abating. The issues of the French Revolution were to cause 

England and '' 

the French it to flame up portentously. It dominated the whole period 
Revolution ^^^^ ^^ Waterloo. In England the Revolution was des- 
tined to find its most redoubtable and resolute enemy. 



THE CONDITION OF ITALY . 57 

THE ITALIAN STATES 

In Italy, on the other hand, it was to find, partly a receptive pupil, 
partly an easy prey. The most important thing about Italy was that 
it was unimportant. Indeed there was no Italy, no united, single 
country, but only a collection of petty states, generally back- . j . 
ward in their political and economic development. Once lection of 
masters in their own house, the Italians had long ago fallen ^^^ ^ ^^ 
from their high estate and had for centuries been in more or less 
subjection to foreigners, to Spaniards, to Austrians, sometimes to the 
French. This had reacted unfavorably upon their characters, and 
had made them timid, time-serving, self-indulgent, pessimistic. 
They had no great attachment to their governments, save possibly 
in Piedmont and in the republics of Venice and Genoa, and there 
was no reason why they should have. Several of the gov- •^g^kness of 
ernments were importations from abroad, or rather imposi- their govern- 
tions, which had never struck root in the minds or interests of ™^°*^ 
the people. The political atmosphere was one of indifference, weari- 
ness, disillusionment. However, toward the end of the eighteenth 
century there were signs of an awakening. The Italians could never 
long be unmindful of the glories of their past. They had their 
haunting traditions which would never allow them to forget or 
renounce their rights, however oppressed they might be. They were 
a people of imagination and of fire, though they long appeared to 
foreigners quite the reverse, as in fact the very stuff of which willing 
slaves are made, a view which was seriously erroneous. It cannot 
be said that there was in the eighteenth century any movement 
aiming at making Italy a nation, but there were poets and historians 
who flashed out, now and then, with some patriotic phrase or figure 
that revealed vividly a shining goal on the distant horizon Aspirations 
toward which all Italians ought to press. "The day will for unity 
come," said Alfieri, "when the Italians will be born again, audacious 
on the field of battle." Humanity was not meant to be shut in by 
such narrow horizons as those presented by these petty states, but 
was entitled to more spacious destinies. This longing for national 
unity was as yet the passion of only a few, of men of imagination 
who had a lively sense of Italy's great past and who also possessed 
an instinct for the future. A French writer expressed a mood quite 
general with cultivated people when she said : "The Italians are far 



58 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 




ITALY 

IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 
1770 



THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE 59^ 

more remarkable because of what they have been and because of 
what they might be than because of what they now are." Seeds of 
a new Italy were already germinating. They were not, however, 
to yield their fruit until well into the nineteenth century. 

GER]SL\NY — THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE 

Turning to the east of France we find Germany, the country that 
was to be the chief battlefield of Europe for many long years, and that 
was to undergo the most surprising transformations. Ger- xhe German 
many, like Italy, was a collection of small states, only these states form 

r , . , . , -^ , the Holy 

states were tar more numerous than m the penmsula to the Roman 
south. Germany had a form of unity, at least it pretended E™?""* 
to have, in the so-called Holy Roman Empire. How many states 
were included in it, it is difficult to say ; at least 360, if in the reckon- 
ing are included all the nobles who recognized no superior save the 
emperor, who held their power directly from him and were subject 
to no one else. There were more than fifty free or imperial cities, 
holding directly from the emperor and managing their own affairs ; 
and numerous ecclesiastical states, all independent of each other. 
Then there were small states like Baden and Wiirtemberg and 
Bavaria and many others. In all this empire there were only two 
states of any importance in the general affairs of Europe — Prussia 
and Austria. 

This empire with its high-sounding names, " Holy " and " Roman," ■ 
was incredibly weak and inefficient. Its emperor, not hereditary but 
elective, was nothing but a pompous, solemn pretense. He ^^^ 
had no real authority, could give no orders, could create no phantom 
armies, could follow out no policies, good or bad, for the ®™p®''°'' 
German princes had during the course of the centuries robbed him of 
all the usual and necessary attributes of power. He was little more 
than a gorgeous figure in a pageant. There were, in addition, an 
imperial diet or national assembly, and an imperial tribunal, but 
they were as palsied as was the emperor. 

What was important in Germany was not the empire, which was 
powerless for defense, useless for any serious purpose, but the separate 
states that composed it, and indeed only a few of these had ^j^^ ^^^^^ 
any significance. All these petty German princelings re- German 
sponded to two emotions. All were jealous of their independ- 
ence and all were eager to annex each other's territory. They 



6o EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

never thought of the interests of Germany, of the empire, of the 
Fatherland. What power they had they had largely secured by 
despoiling the empire. Patriotism was not one of their weaknesses. 
Each was looking out emphatically for himself. To make a strong, 
united nation out of such mutually repellent atoms would be nothing 
less than magical. The material was most unpromising. Neverthe- 
less the feat has been accomplished, as we shall see, although, as in 
the case of Italy, not until well on into the nineteenth century. 

The individual states were everything, the empire was nothing, and 

with it the French Revolutionists and Napoleon were destined to play 

Austria and great havoc. Two states, as has been said, counted par- 

Prussia the ticularly, Austria and Prussia, enemies generally, rivals 

only impor- ■' a j • 

tant states always, allies sometimes. Austria was old and famous, 
in Germany prussia really quite new but rapidly acquiring a formidable 
reputation for ambition. The former was ruled by the House of 
Hapsburg, -the latter by the House of Hohenzollern. There was no 
Austrian nation, but there was the most extraordinary jumble of 
states and races and languages to be found in Europe, whose sole 
bond of union was loyalty to the reigning house. The Hapsburg 
dominions were widely, loosely scattered, though the main bulk 

The 

Hapsburg of them was in the Danube valley. There was no common 
dominions Austrian patriotism ; there were Bohemians, Hungarians, 
Milanese, Netherlands, Austrians proper, each with a certain sense 
of unity, a certain self-consciousness, but there was no single nation 
comprehending, fusing all these elements. Austria was not like 
France or England. Nevertheless there were twenty-four millions 
of people under the direction of one man, and therefore they were 
an important factor in the politics of Europe. 

PRUSSIA 

In the case of Prussia, however, we have a real though still rudimen- 
tary nation, hammered together by hard, repeated, well-directed 
p . . blows delivered by a series of energetic, ambitious rulers. 
the Hohen- Prussia as a kingdom dated only from 1 701 , but the heart of this 
zoUerns state was Brandenburg, and Brandenburg had begun a slow 

upward march as early as the fifteenth century, when the Hohen- 
zollerns came from South Germany to take control of it. In the six- 
teenth century the possessions of this family were scattered from the 
region of the Rhine to the borders of Russia. How to make them 



PRUSSIA 



6 1 




62 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

into a single state, responsive to a single will, was the problem. In 
each section there were feudal estates, asserting their rights against 
their ruler. But the Hohenzollerns had a very clear notion of what 
they wanted. They wished and intended to increase their own power 
as rulers, to break down all opposition within, and without steadily to 
aggrandize their domains. In the realization of their program, to 
which they adhered tenaciously from generation to generation, they 
were successful. Prussia grew larger and larger, the government 
became more and more autocratic, and the emphasis in the state 
came to be more and more placed upon the army. Mirabeau (me- 
ra-bo') was quite correct when he said that the great national in- 
dustry of Prussia was war. Prussian rulers were hard-working, 
generally conceiving their mission soberly and seriously as one of 
service to the state, not at all as one inviting to personal self-indul- 
gence. They were hard-headed, and intelligent in developing the 
economic resources of a country originally little favored by nature. 
They were attentive to the opportunities afforded by German and 
European politics for the advancement of rulers who had the neces- 
sary intelligence and audacity. In the long reign of Frederick II, 
called the Great (i 740-1 786), and unquestionably far and away the 
ablest of all the rulers of the Hohenzollern dynasty, we see the bril- 
liant and faithful expression of the most characteristic features, 
methods, and aspirations of this vigorous royal house. 

The successive monarchs of Prussia justified the extraordinary em- 
phasis they put upon military force by pointing to the fact that their 
countrv had no natural boundaries but was simply an undif- 

Importance - '^ -' 

of the army ferentiated part of the great sandy plain of North German}', 
m Prussia ^j^^^ ^^ rivcr or no mountain range gave protection, that the 
way of the invader was easy. This was quite true, but it was also 
equally true that Prussia's neighbors had no greater protection 
from her than she from them. As far as geography was concerned, 
invasion of Prussia was no easier than aggression from Prussia. At 
any rate every Prussian ruler felt himself first a general, head of an 
army which it was his pride to increase. Thus the Great Elector, 
who had ruled from 1640 to 1688, had inherited an army of less than 
4,000 men, and had bequeathed one of 24,000 to his successor. The 
father of Frederick II had inherited one of 38,000 and had left one of 
83,000. Thus Prussia with a population of two and a half millions 
had an army of 83,000, while Austria with a population of 24,000,000 



THE YOUTH OF FREDERICK THE GREAT 63 

had one of less than 100,000. With this force, highly drilled and 
amply provided with the sinews of war by the systematic and rigor- 
ous economies of his father, Frederick was destiried to go far. He 
is one of the few men who have changed the face of Europe. By 
war, and the subsidiary arts that minister unto it, Frederick pushed 
his small state into the very forefront of European politics. Before 
his reign was half over he had made it one of the Great Powers, every- 
where reckoned as such, although in population, area, and wealth, 
compared with the other Great Powers, it was small indeed. 

FREDERICK THE GREAT 

As a youth all of Frederick's tastes had been for letters, for art, for 
music, for philosophy and the sciences, for conversation, for the deli- 
cacies and elegancies of culture. The French language and 
French literature were his passion and remained his chief '^ ^°" 
source of enjoyment all through his life. He wrote French verses, 
he hated military exercises, he played the flute, he detested tobacco, 
heavy eating and drinking, and the hunt, which appeared to his father 
as the natural manly and royal pleasures. The thought that this 
youth, so indifferent or hostile to, the stern, bleak, serious ideals of 
duty incumbent upon the royal house for the welfare of Prussia, so 
interested in the frivolities and fripperies of life, so carelessly self- 
indulgent, would one day be king and would probably wreck the state 
by his incompetence and his levity, so enraged the father, Frederick 
William I, a rough, boorish, tyrannical, hard-working, and intensely 
patriotic man, that he subjected the Crown Prince to a Draconian 
discipline which at times attained a pitch of barbarity, caning him 
in the presence of the army, boxing his ears before' the common people, 
compelling him from a prison window to witness the execution of his 
most intimate friend, who had tried to help him escape from this 
odious tyranny by attempted flight from the country. In such a 
furnace was the young prince's mettle steeled, his heart hardened. 
Frederick came out of this ordeal self-contained, cynical, crafty, 
but sobered and submissive to the fierce paternal will. He did not, 
according to his father's expression, "kick or rear" again. For 
several years he buckled to the prosaic task of learning his future 
trade in the traditional HohenzoUern manner, discharging the 
duties of minor offices, familiarizing himself with the dry details 
of administration, and invested with larger responsibilities as 



64 



EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 



It was thought 



his reformation seemed, in the eyes of his father, satisfactorily 
to progress. 

When he came to the throne in 1 740 at the age of twenty-eight he 

came equipped with a free and keen intellect, with a character of iron, 

^ J . , and with an ambition that was soon to set the world in flame. 

Frederick ,r i • 

becomes He ruled for forty-six years and before half his reign was over 

^°^ it was evident that he had no peer in Europe, 

that he would adopt a 
manner of life quite dif- 
ferent from his father's. 
Instead, however, there 
was the same austerity, 
the same simplicity, the 
same intense devotion to 
work, the same single- 
ness of aim, that aim 
being the exaltation of 
Prussia. The machinery 
of government was not 
altered, but it was now 
driven at unprecedented 
speed by this vigorous, 
aggressive, supple per- 
sonality. For Frederick 
possessed supreme abil- 
ity and displayed it from 
the day of his accession 
to the day of his death. 
He was, as Lord Acton 
has said, "the most con- 
summate practical genius 
that, in modern times, 
has inherited a throne." 
His first important act 
revealed the character 




Frederick the Great 

From an engraving by Cunejo, after the painting 
by Cunningham. 



Attacks 
Austria and 



and the intentions of the ruler. For this man, who as a youth 
had loathed the life of a soldier and had shirked its obligations 
seizes Silesia ^^ j^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^j^j^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ pj.Qve himself one of the great 

military commanders of the world's history. He was the most success- 



FREDERICK'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 65 

ful of the robber barons in which the annals of Germany abounded, 
and he had the ethics of the class. He invaded Silesia, a large and 
rich province belonging to Austria and recognized as hers by a pe- 
culiarly solemn treaty signed by Prussia. But Frederick wanted it 
and considered the moment opportune as an inexperienced young 
woman, Maria Theresa (ma-re'-a te-re'-sa), had just ascended the 
Austrian throne. " My soldiers were ready, my purse was full," said 
Frederick concerning this famous raid. Of all the inheritance of 
Maria Theresa, "Silesia," said he, "was that part which was most 
useful to the House of Brandenburg." " Take what you can," he also 
remarked, "you are never wrong unless you are obliged to give Frederick's 
back." In these utterances Frederick paints himself and his political 
reign in imperishable colors. Success of the most palpable p"""^"!"'^^ 
sort was his reward. Neither plighted faith, nor chivalry toward a 
woman, nor any sense of personal honor ever deterred him from any 
policy that might promise gain to Prussia. One would scarcely 
suspect from such hardy sentiments that Frederick had as a young 
man written a treatise against the statecraft of Machiavelli (mak-i-a- 
v^el'-li). That eminent Florentine would, it is safe to say, have been 
entirely content with the practical precepts according to which his 
titled critic fashioned his actual conduct. The true, authentic spirit 
Df Machiavelli's political philosophy has never been expressed with 
greater brevity and precision than by Frederick. "If there is any- 
thing to be gained by being honest, honest we will be ; and if it is 
necessary to deceive, let us be scoundrels." 

If there is any defense for Frederick's conduct to be found in the 
[act that his principles or his lack of them were shared by most of his 
:rowned contemporaries and by many other rulers before and since, 
lie is entitled to that defense. He himself, however, was never much 
:oncerned about this aspect of the matter. It was, in his opinion, 
frankly negligible. 

Frederick seized Silesia with ease in 1740, so unexpected was the 
attack. He thus added to Prussia a territory larger than Massa- 
Ausetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island combined, and a pop- The Siiesian 
ulation of over a million and a quarter. But having seized it, ^^'s 
lie was forced to fight intermittently for twenty-three years before he 
could be sure of his ability to retain it. The first two Siiesian wars 
( 1 740-1 748) are best known in history as the wars of the Austrian 
Succession. The third was the Seven Years' War, a world conflict, as 



66 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

we have seen, involving most of the great states of Europe, but im- 
portant to Frederick mainly because of its relation to his retention 
of Silesia. 

THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR 

It was the Seven Years' War (i 756-1 763) that made the name and 
fame of Frederick ring throughout the world. But that deadly 
struggle several times seemed about to engulf him and his country in 
utter ruin. Had England not been his ally, aiding with her subsidies 
and with her campaigns against France, in Europe, Asia, America, 
and on the high seas, thus preventing that country from fully co- 
operating against Prussia, Frederick must have failed. The odds 
against him were stupendous. He, the ruler of a petty state with 
not more than 4,000,000 inhabitants, was confronted by a coalition 
of Austria, France, Russia, Sweden, and many little German states, 
with a total population perhaps twenty times as large as Prussia's. 
This coalition had already arranged for the division of his kingdom. 
He was to be left only Brandenburg, the primitive core of the state, 
the original territory given to the House of HohenzoUern in 141 5 by 
the emperor. 

Practically the entire continent was united against this little state 
which a short time before had hardly entered in to the calculations 
Con uest of o^ European politics. But Frederick was undaunted. He 
Saxony overran Saxony, a neutral country, seized its treasury because 

he needed it, and, by a flagrant breach of international usage, forced 
its citizens to fight in his armies, which were thus considerably 
increased. When reproached for this unprecedented act he laconi- 
cally replied that he rather prided himself on being original. 

The war thus begun had its violent ups and downs. Attacked from 

the south by the Austrians, from the east by the Russians, and always 

outnumbered, Frederick, fighting a defensive war, owed his salvation 

to the rapidity of his manoeuvres, to the slowness of those of his 

enemies, to his generally superior tactics, and to the fact that there 

was an entire lack of coordination among his adversaries. He 

Rossbadi, won the battle of Rossbach in 1757, his most brilliant victory, 

November s. whose fame has not yet died away. With an army of only 

^'^^ 20,000 he defeated a combined French and German army of 

55,000 in an engagement that lasted only an hour and a half, took 

16,000 prisoners, seventy- two cannon, and sustained a loss of less 



FREDERICK AND THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR 67 

:han a thousand men himself. Immense was the enthusiasm evoked 
)y this Prussian triumph over what was reputed to be the finest 
irmy in Europe. It mattered little that the majority of the con- 
quered army were Germans. The victory was popularly considered 
me of Germans over French, and such has remained its reputation 
;ver since in the German national consciousness, thus greatly stirred 
md vivified. 

Two years later Frederick suffered an almost equally disastrous 
iefeat at the hands of the Austrians and Russians at Kunersdorf. 
'I have had two horses killed under me," he wrote the night 
ifter this battle, "and it is my inisfortune that I still live Kunersdorf, 
nyself. ... Of an army of 48,000 men I have only 3,000 August 12, 
eft. ... I have no more resources and, not to lie about it, 
'. think everything is lost." 

Later, after another disaster, he wrote : "I should like to hang my- 
ielf, but we must act the play to the end." In this temper he fought 
)n, year after year, through elation, through depression, with ^ ^ ^^^^^ 
iefeat behind him and defeat staring him in the face, relieved character of 
-yy occasional successes, saved by the incompetence and folly * ^ ^^^ 
)f his enemies, then plunged in gloom again, but always fighting for 
:ime and for some lucky stroke of fortune, such as the death of a 
lostile sovereign with its attendant interruption or change of policy, 
rhe story is too crowded, too replete with incident, to be condensed 
lere. Only the general impression of a prolonged, racking, desperate 
struggle can be indicated. Gritty, cool, alert, and agile, Frederick 
nanaged to hold on until his enemies were willing to make peace. 

He came out of this war with his territories intact but not increased, 
silesia he retained, but Saxony he was forced to relinquish. ^^^ , 
^e came out of it, also, prematurely old, hard, bitter, mis- Seven Years' 
mthropic, but he had made upon the world an indelible im- ^' 
Dression. His people had been decimated and appallingly im- 
Doverished ; nevertheless he was the victor and great was his renown. 
Frederick had conquered Silesia in a month and had then spent many 
^ears fighting to retain it. All that he had won was fame, but that he 
mjoyed in full and overflowing measure. 

THE LATER YEARS OF THE REIGN 

Frederick lived twenty-three years longer, years of unremitting and 
/ery fruitful toil. In a hundred ways he sought to hasten the recuper- 



68 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

ation and the development of his sorely visited land, draining 

marshes, clearing forests, encouraging industries, opening schools, 

Frederick in welcoming and favoring immigrants from other countries. 

time of Indeed over 300,000 of these responded to the various induce- 

peace ments offered, and Frederick founded more than 800 villages. 

He reorganized the army, replenished the public treasury, remodeled 

the legal code. In religious affairs he was the most tolerant ruler in 

Europe, giving refuge to the Jesuits when they were driven out of 

Catholic countries — France, Portugal, Spain — and when their 

order was abolished by the Pope himself. "In Prussia," said he, 

"every one has the right to win salvation in his own way." 

In practice this was about the only indubitable right the individual 

possessed, for Frederick's government was unlimited, although 

cht^rTcter of frequently enlightened, despotism. His was an absolute 

his govern- monarchy, surrounded by a privileged nobility, resting upon 

an impotent mass of peasantry. His was a militarist state and 

only nobles could become general officers. Laborious, rising at three 

in summer, at four in the winter, and holding himself tightly to 

his mission as "first servant to the King of Prussia," Frederick knew 

more drudgery than pleasure. But he was a tyrant to his finger 

tips, and we do not find in the Prussia of his day any room made 

for that spirit of freedom which was destined in the immediate future 

to wrestle in Europe with this outworn system of autocracy. 

In 1772 the conqueror of Silesia proceeded to gather new laurels of 

a similar kind. In conjunction with the monarchs of Russia and 

The first Austria he partially dismembered Poland, a crime of which the 

partition of world has not yet heard the last. The task was easy of 

° ^"^ accomplishment, as Poland was defenseless. Frederick 

frankly admitted that the act was that of brigands, and his opinion 

has been ratified by the general agreement of posterity. 

When Frederick died in 1786, at the age of seventy-four, he left his 

kingdom nearly doubled in size and with a population more than 

p . . . doubled. In all his actions he thought, not of Germany, but of 

the Great Prussia, always Prussia. Germany was an abstraction that 

an ermany ^^^ ^^ j^^j^ upon his practical mind. He considered the 

German language boorish, "a jargon, devoid of every grace," and 

he was sure that Germany had no literature worthy of the name. 

Nevertheless, he was regarded throughout German lands, beyond 

Prussia, as a national hero, and he filled the national thought and 



GERMANY IN 1789 



llohrnzollorn Lands Wot lin T.a n.ls Wittolshnrh Lands 

Prussia I I Albertine I I Bavaria 

Franconian line I I Ernestine I 1 Palatinate 

Ol.lo nbnriS Lands Haps biirii L ands 

r~ I nenniark I I Imperial Cities I ^ 

I I I llol!,tein and i I Kcclesiastical I I 

Oldenburg States 



iickstiidt •Mt-CI 

Altopa Laucji- g 

.aucnburi 




THE RISE OF RUSSIA 69 

imagination as no other German had done since Luther. His per- 
sonaUty, his ideas, and his methods became an enduring and potent 
factor in the development of Germany. 

But the trouble with despotism as a form of government is that a 
strong or enlightened despot may so easily be succeeded by a feeble 
or foolish one, as proved to be the case when Frederick died a weak 
and was succeeded in 1786 by Frederick William II, under suc^elds a 
whom and under whose successor came evil days, contrasting strong one 
most unpleasantly with the brilliant ones that had gone be- 
fore. 

RUSSIA 

Lying beyond Austria and Prussia, stretching awaj^ indefinitely 
into the east, was the other remaining great power in European 
politics, Russia. 

Though the largest state on the continent, Russia did not enter 
upon the scene of European politics as a factor of importance until 
very late, indeed until the eighteenth century. During that century 
she took her place among the great European powers and her influence 
in the world went on increasing down to the outbreak, in 19 14, of 
the European War. Her previous history had been peculiar, Race and 
differing in many and fundamental respects from that of her religion 
western neighbors. She had lived apart, unnoticed and unknown. 
She was connected with Europe by two ties, those of race and 
religion. The Russians were a Slavic people, related to the Poles, 
the Bohemians, the Serbs, and the other branches of that great 
family which spreads over Eastern Europe. And as early as the 
tenth century they had been converted to Christianity, not to that 
form that prevailed in the West, but to the Orthodox Greek form, 
which had its seat in Constantinople. The missionaries who had 
brought religion and at the same time the beginnings of civilization 
had come from that city. After the conquest of Constantinople by 
the infidel Turks in 1453 the Russians considered themselves its legit- 
imate heirs, the representatives of its ideas and traditions. Con- 
stantinople and the Eastern Empire of which it had been the capital 
exercised over their imaginations a spell that only increased with 
time. 

But the great central fact of Russian history for hundreds of years 
was not her connection with Europe, which, after all, was slight, but 



70 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

her connection with Asia, which was close and profound in its effects. 
The Principality of Muscovy, as Russia was then called from its 
Russia in- capital, Moscow, was conquered by the Mongols, barbarians 
conquered by ^rom Asia, in the thirteenth century, and for nearly three 
Asiatic tribes hundred years Russian princes paid tribute and made occa- 
sional visits of submission to the far-off Great Khan. Though con- 
stantly resenting this subjection, they did not escape its effects. 
They themselves became half-Asiatic. The men of Russia dressed 
in Oriental fashion, wearing the long robes with long sleeves, the tur- 
bans, and slippers of the East. They wore their hair and beards long. 
The women were kept secluded and were heavily veiled when in 
public. A young girl saw her husband for the first time the day of 
her marriage. There was no such thing as society as we understand 
the term. The government was an Oriental tyranny, unrestrained, 
regardless of human life. In addressing the ruler a person must 
completely prostrate himself, his forehead touching the floor; a 
difficult as well as a degrading attitude for one human being to 
assume toward another. 

In time the Russians threw off the Mongol domination, after ter- 
rible struggles, and themselves in turn conquered northern Asia, that 
is, Siberia. A new royal house came to the throne in 1613, the House 
of Romanoff, which ruled in Russia until 191 7. 

PETER THE GREAT, 1672-1725 

But the Russians continued to have only the feeblest connection 
with Europe, knowing little of its civilization, caring less, content to 
vegetate in indolence and obscurity. Out of this dull and laggard 
state they were destined to be roughly and emphatically roused by 
one of the most energetic rulers known to history, Peter the Great, 
whose reign of thirty-six years (1689-1725) marks a tremendous 
epoch, both by what it actually accomplished and by what it indicated 
ought to be the goal of national endeavor. 

As a boy Peter had been given no serious instruction, no training in 
self-control, but had been allowed to run wild, and had picked up all 
Peter's sorts of acquaintances and companions, many of them for- 

boyhood eigncrs. It was the chance association with Europeans liv- 

ing in the foreign quarter of Moscow that proved the decisive fact of • 
his life, shaping his entire career. From them he got a most irregular, 
haphazard, but original education, learning a little German, a little 



THE YOUTH OF PETER THE GREAT 



71 



Dutch, some snatches of science, arithmetic, geometry. His chief 
boyish interest was in mechanics and its relation to the mihtary art. 
With him playing soldier was more serious than with most boys. He 
used to build wooden fortresses, surrounded with walls and moats 
and bastions. Some of his friends would defend the redoubt while 
he and the others at- 
tacked it. Sometimes 
lives were lost, always 
some were wounded. 
Such are the fortunes of 
war, though not usually 
of juvenile war. "The 
boy is amusing himself," 
was the comment of his 
sister, who was exercising 
the regency in his name. 
Passionately fond of mili- 
tary games, Peter was 
also absorbingly inter- 
ested in boats and ships, 
and eagerly learned all he 
could of navigation, which 
was not much, for the 
arts of shipbuilding and 
navigation were in their 
very infancy in Russia. 

Learning that his sister 
Sophia was planning to 
ignore his right to the 
throne and to become ruler herself, he dropped his sham fights and 
his sailing, swept his sister aside into a nunnery, and assumed control 
of the state. Convinced that Europe was in every way su- xhe acces- 
perior to Russia, that Russia had everything to gain and ^^°^ °* Petei 
nothing to lose from a knowledge of the ways and institutions of the 
western countries, Peter's policy from the beginning to the end of 
his reign was to bring about the closest possible connection between 
his backward country and the progressive and brilliant civilization 
which had been built up in England, France, Holland, Italy, and 
Germany. 




Peter the Great 
From an engraving by Anderloni. 



72 EUROPE L\ THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

But even with the best intentions this was not an easy task. For 
Russia had no point of physical contact with the nations of Western 
The Dolic Europe. She could 'not freely communicate with them, for 

of the " opcB between her and them was a wall consisting of Sweden, Poland, 
^'" °^ and Turkey. Russia was nearly a land-locked country. 

Sweden controlled all that coast line along the Baltic which ultimately 
became Russian, Turkey controlled all the coast line of the Black Sea. 
The only port Russia possessed was far to the north, at Archangel, 
and this was frozen during nine months of the year. To communicate 
freely and easily with the West, Russia must "open a window" 
somewhere, as Peter expressed it. Then the light could stream in. 
He must have an ice-free port in European waters. To secure this 
he fought repeated campaigns against Turkey and Sweden. W^ith 
the latter power there was intermittent war for twenty years, very 
successful in the end, though only after distressing reverses. He 
conquered the Baltic Provinces from Sweden, Courland, Esthonia, 
and Livonia, and thus secured a long coast line. Russia might now 
have a navy and a merchant fleet and sea-borne commerce. "It is 
not land I want, but water," Peter had said. He now had enough, 
at least to begin with. 

Meanwhile he had sent fifty young Russians of the best families to 
England, Holland, and Venice to learn the arts and sciences of the 
, West, especially shipbuilding and fortifications. Later he had 

travels in gone himself for the same purpose, to study on the spot the 
the West civilization whose superiority he recognized and intended to im- 
pose upon his own country, if that were possible. This was a famous 
voyage. Traveling under the strictest incognito, as "Peter Mikail- 
ovitch," he donned laborer's clothes and worked for months in the 
shipyards of Holland and England. He was interested in everything. 
He visited mills and factories of every kind, asking innumerable 
questions: "What is this for? How does that work?" He made 
a sheet of paper with his own hands. During his hours of recreation 
he visited museums, theaters, hospitals, galleries. He saw printing 
presses in operation, attended lectures on anatomy, studied surgerj' 
a little, and even acquired some proficiency in the humble and 
useful art of pulling teeth. He bought collections of laws, and 
models of all sorts of machines, and engaged many officers, me- 
chanics, printers, architects, sailors, and workmen of every kind, 
to go to Russia to engage in the task of imparting instruction to 



THE REFORMS OF PETER THE GREAT 73 

a nation which, in Peter's opinion, needed it and should receive 
it, willy-nilly. 

Peter was called home suddenly by the news of a revolt among the 
imperial troops devoted to the old regime and apprehensive of the 
coming innovations. They were punished with every refine- g^ 
ment of savage cruelty, their regiments disbanded, and a revolt at 
veritable reign of terror preceded the introduction of the °°^^ 
new system. 

PETER'S TRANSFORMATION OF RUSSIA 

Then the Czar began with energy his transformation of Russia, as 
he described it. The process continued all through his reign. It 
was not an elaborate, systematic plan, deliberately worked out ^j^^ 
beforehand, but first this reform, then that, was adopted and of Peter's 
enforced, and in the end the sum total of all these measures of '^ ^"^"^ 
detail touched the national life at nearly every point. Some of them 
concerned manners and customs, others economic matters, others 
matters purely political. . Peter at once fell upon the long beards 
and Oriental costumes, which, in his opinion, symbolized the con- 
servatism of Old Russia, which he was resolved to shatter. Arming 
himself with a pair of shears, he himself clipped the liberal beards and 
moustaches of many of his nobles, and cut their long coats at the 
knee. They must set the style and the style must be that of France 
and Germany. Having given this sensational exhibition of his 
imperial purpose, he then compromised somewhat, allowing men 
to wear their beards long, but only on condition of submitting to a 
graduated tax upon those ornaments. The approbation of the 
emperor, the compulsion of fashion, combined with considerations 
of economy, rapidly wrought a surprising change in the appearance 
of the manhood of Russia. Barbers and tailors were stationed at 
the entrances of towns to facilitate the process by slashing the 
offending members until they conformed to European standards. 
Women were forbidden to wear the veil and were released from the 
captivity of the harem, or terem, as it was called in Russia. Peter 
had attended the "assemblies" of France and England and had 
seen men and women dancing and conversing together in public. 
He now ordered the husbands and fathers of Russia to bring their 
wives and daughters to all social entertainments. The adjustments 
were awkward at first, the women frequently standing or sitting 



74 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

stiffly apart at one end of the room, the men smoking and drinking 
by themselves at the otlier. But finally society as understood ih 
Europe emerged from these temporary and amusing difficulties. 
Peter gave lessons in dancing to some of his nobles, having himself 
acquired that accomplishment while on his famous trip. They were 
expected, in turn, to pass the art on to others. 

The organs of government, national and local, were remodeled by 

the adoption of forms and methods known to Sweden, Germany, and 

other countries, and the state became more efficient and at 

Creation of ' 

an army and the samc time more powerful. The army was enlarged, 
^ "^^^^ equipped, and trained mainly in imitation of Germany. A 

navy was created and the importance of the sea to the general life of 
the nation gradually dawned upon the popular intelligence. The 
economic development of the country was begun, factories were 
established, mines were opened, and canals were cut. The church 
was brought into closer subjection to the state. Measures were 
taken against vagabondage and robbery, widely prevalent evils. 
Education of a practical sort was encouraged. The Julian calendar 
was introduced and is still in force, though the other nations of 
Europe have since adopted another and more accurate chronology. 
Peter even undertook to reform the language of Russia, striking 
out eight of the more cumbersome letters of the alphabet and simpli- 
fying the form of some of the others. 

All these changes encountered resistance, resistance born of indo- 
lence, of natural conservatism, of religious scruples — was it not 
^ . impious for Holy Russia to abandon her native customs and to 

llesistance ' i i ■ 

to these imitate the heretics of the West ? But Peter went on smashing 

reforms j^-g ^^y through as bcst he could, crushing opposition by fair 

means and by foul, for the quality of the means was a matter of in- 
difference to him, if only they were successful. Here we have the 
spectacle of a man who, himself a semi-barbarian, was bent upon 
civilizing men more barbarous than he. 

As the ancient capital, Moscow, was the stronghold of stif^ conserv- 
atism, was wedded to the old ideas and customs, Peter resolved to 
^, , J. build a new capital on the Baltic. There, on islands and 

The foundmg '■ 

of Saint marshcs at the mouth of a river which frequently overflowed, 

Petersburg ^^ built at frightful cost in human life and suffering the city of 

St. Petersburg. Everything had to be created literally from the 

ground up. Forests of piles had to be driven into the slime to the 



THE FOUNDING OF SAINT PETERSBURG 75 

solid earth beneath to furnish the secure foundations. Tens of 
"thousands of soldiers and peasants were drafted for the work. At 
first they had no implements, but were forced to dig with sticks and 
carry the rubbish away in their coats. No adequate provisions were 
made for them ; they slept unprotected in the open air, their food 
was insufftcient, and they died by thousands, only to be replaced 
by other thousands. All through the reign the desperate, rough 
process went on. The will of the autocrat, rich in expedients, 
triumphed over all obstacles. Every great landowner was required 
to build in the city a residence of a certain size and style. No ship 
might enter without bringing a certain quantity of stone for building 
purposes. St. Petersburg was cut by numerous canals, as were the 
cities of Holland. The Czar required the nobles to possess boats. 
Some of them, not proficient in the handling of these novel craft, 
were drowned. Toward the close of this reign Peter transferred the 
government to this city which stood on the banks of the Neva, a 
monument to his imagination, his energy, and his persistence, a city 
with no hampering traditions, with no past, but with only an un- 
trammeled future, an appropriate expression of the spirit of the 
New Russia which Peter was laboring to create. 

PETER'S CHARACTER 

He was, indeed, a strange leader for a people which needed above 
all to shake itself free from what was raw and crude, he was himself 
so raw and crude. A man of violent passions, capable and 
guilty of orgies of dissipation, of acts of savage cruelty, hard and 
fiendish in his treatment even of those nearest to him, his sister, 
his wife, and his son, using willingly as instruments of progress the 
atrocious knout and wheel and stake, Peter was neither a model ruler, 
nor a model man. Yet, with all these traits of primal barbarism in 
his nature, he had many redeeming points. Good-humored, frank, 
and companionable under ordinary circumstances, he was entirely 
natural, as loyal in his friendships as he was bitter in his enmities. 
Masterful, titanic, there was in him a wild vitality, an immense 
energy, and he was great in the singleness of his aim. He did not 
succeed in transforming Russia ; that could not be accomplished in 
one generation nor in two. But he left an army of 200,000 men, he 
connected Russia with the sea by the coast line of the Baltic, thus 



76 



EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 



opening a contact with countries that were more advanced, intel- 
lectually and socially, and he raised a standard and started a tradition. 

PETER'S SUCCESSORS 

Then followed upon his death a series of mediocre rulers, under 
whom it seemed likely that the ground gained might be lost. But 
Elizabeth under Elizabeth (1741-1762) Russia played an important part 
(1741-1762) in the Seven Years' War, thus showing her altered position in 
Europe, and with the ad- 
vent of Catherine II 
(1762- 1 796) the process 
of Europeanizing Russia 
and of expanding her 
territories and magnify- 
ing her position in in- 
ternational politics was 
resumed with vigor and 
carried out with success. 
Catherine was a Ger- 
man princess, the wife of 
the Czar Peter III, 

Catherine 

the Great who, prOVmg a 

(1762-1796) worthless ruler, was 
deposed, after a reign of 
a few months, then done 
to death, probably with 
the connivance of his 
wife. Catherine became 
empress, and for thirty- 
four years ruled Russia 
with an iron hand. Fond of pleasure, fond of work, a woman 
of intellectual tastes or at least pretensions, which she satisfied 
by intimate correspondence with Voltaire, Diderot, and other French 
philosophers of the day, being rewarded for her condescension and 
her favors by their enthusiastic praise of her as the "Semiramis of 
the North," Catherine passes as one of the enlightened despots of 
her century. Being of western birth, she naturally sympathized 
with the policy of introducing western civilization into Russia, 
and gave that policy her vigorous support. 




Catherine II 
After the portrait by Shebanoff. 



CATHERINE THE GREAT 77 

But her chief significance in history is her foreign policy. Three 
countries, we have seen, stood between Russia and the countries of 
Western Europe — Sweden, Poland, and Turkey. Peter had conquered 
the first and secured the water route by the Baltic. Cath- ^ ,. • , 

•> Catherine s 

erine devoted her entire reign to conquering the other two. foreign 
The former she accomplished by infamous means and with ^° "^^ 
rare completeness. By the end of her reign Poland had been utterly 
destroyed and Russia had pushed her boundaries far westward until 
they touched those of Prussia and Austria. Catherine was not able 
to dismember Turkey as Poland was dismembered, but she gained 
from her the Crimea and the northern shores of the Black Sea from 
the Caucasus to the Dniester. She had even dreamed of driving the 
Turk entirely from Europe and of extending her own influence 
down to the Mediterranean by the establishment of a Byzantine 
empire that should be dependent upon Russia. But any dream 
of getting to Constantinople was a dream indeed, as the troubled 
history of a subsequent century was to show. Henceforth, however, 
Europe could count on one thing with certainty ; namelj^, that Russia 
would be a factor to be considered in any rearrangement of the map 
of the Balkan peninsula, in any determination of the Eastern ques- 
tion. 

This rise of Russia, like the rise of Prussia, to a position of com- 
manding importance in European politics, was the work of the 
eighteenth century. Both were characteristic products of that age. 

EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

The more one examines in general the governtnents of Europe in 
I the eighteenth century, and the policies which they followed or 
attempted to follow, the less is one impressed with either their , 

I ^ ' ^ Low tone of 

( wisdom or their morality. The control was everywhere in the European 
I hands of the few and was everywhere directed to the advan- p°'^*"^^ 
tage of the few. The idea that it was the first duty of the state to 
assure, if possible, the welfare of the great majority of the _. . . ^ 
people was not the idea recognized in actual practice. The aggrandize- 
first duty of the state was to increase its dominions by hook or ^^^'^ 
crook, and to provide for the satisfaction of the rulers and the privi- 
leged classes. One could find in all Europe hardly a trace of 
what we call democracy. Europe was organized aristocrati- everywiTe're^ 
cally, and for the benefit of aristocracies. This was true even in power 



78 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

in such a country as England, which had a parhament and estab- 
hshed liberties ; even in republics, like Venice or Genoa or the cantons 
of Switzerland. 

The condition of the vast mass of the people in every country was 
the thing least considered. It was everjrwhere deplorable, though 
varying more or less in different countries. The masses, who 
condition of were peasants, were weighed down and hemmed in by laws 
the masses ^^^ institutions and customs that took no account of their 
well-being. In one way or another they were outrageously taxed, 
so that but a small fraction of what they earned went for their own 
support. Throughout most of Europe they did not possess what we 
regard as the mere beginnings of personal liberty, for, except in 
England and France, serfdom, with all its paralyzing restrictions, 
was in force. No one dreamed that the people were entitled to 
education so that they might be better equipped for life. The great 
substructure of European society was an unhappy, unfree, unpro- 
tected, undeveloped mass of human beings, to whom opportunity 
for growth and improvement was closed on every side. 

If the governments of Europe did not seriously consider the interest 
of the most numerous and weakest class, on whose well-being de- 
A gloomy pended absolutely the ultimate well-being of the nations, 
outlook (^[(^ they discharge their other obligations with any greater 

understanding or sense of justice? It cannot be said that they did. 
The distempers in every state were numerous and alarming. The 
writings of contemporaries abound in gloomy prophecies. There was 
a widespread feeling that revolutions, catastrophes, ruin were im- 
pending, that the body politic was nowhere in sound condition, 
extravagance Exccssive expenditures for the maintenance of extravagant 
and taxation ^^Q^-^g^ foj- sumptuous buildings, for favorites of every stripe 
and feather, excessive expenditures for armies and for wars, which 
were frequent, resulted in increasing disorder in the finances of 
the various nations. States resorted more and more to loans with 
the result that the income had to go for the payment of the interest. 
Deficits were chronic, and no country except England had a budget, 
or public and official statement of expenditures and receipts. Taxes 
were increasing and were detestably distributed. Everywhere in 
Europe the richer a man was the less he paid proportionately. As 
new taxes were imposed, exemptions, complete or partial, went 
with them, and the exemptions were for the nobility and, in part 



THE DESPOTS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 79 

for the middle classes, where such existed. Crushing therefore was 
the burden of the lower orders. It was truly a vicious circle. 

These evils were so apparent that now and then they prompted the 
governing authorities to attempt reform. Several rulers in various 
countries made earnest efforts to improve conditions. These Benevolent 
were the "benevolent despots" of the eighteenth century despotism 
who tried reform from above before the French tried it from below. 
On the whole they had no great or permanent success, and the need of 
thoroughgoing changes remained to trouble the future. 

Not only were the governments of Europe generally inefficient in 
all that concerned the full, symmetrical development of the economic, 
intellectual, and moral resources of the people, not only were _, 

' I r- I J fjjg govern- 

they generally repressive and oppressive, allowing little scope to ments of 
the principle of liberty, but they were, in their relations to ^""""p® 
each other, unprincipled, unscrupulous. The state was conceived 
as force, not at all as a moral being, subject to moral obligations 
and restraints. The glory of rulers consisted in extending the 
boundaries of their states, regardless of the rights of other Material 
peoples, regardless even of the rights of other rulers. The success the 
code that governed their relations with each other was prim- ard of con- 
itive indeed. Any means were legitimate, success was the *^"*^* 
only standard of right or wrong. "He who gains nothing, loses," 
wrote Catherine of Russia, one of the "enlightened" despots. The 
dominant idea in all government circles was that the greatness of the 
state was in proportion to its territorial extent, not in proportion 
to the freedom, the prosperity, the education of its people. The 
prevalence of this idea brought it about that every nation sought 
to be ready to take advantage of any weakness or distress that might 
appear in the situation of its neighbors. Armies must be con- ^, , . 

. The faith- 

stantly at hand and diplomacy must be ready for any scurvy lessness of 
trick or infamous crime that might promise hope of gain. It ™°"^''*=^s 
followed that treaties were to be broken whenever there was any 
advantage in breaking them. "It is a mistake to break your word 
without reason," said Frederick II, "for thus you gain the reputation 
of being light and fickle." To keep faith with each other was no 
duty of rulers. There was consequently no certainty in interna- 
tional agreements. 

This indifference to solemn promises was nothing new. The eight- 
eenth century was full of flagrant violations of most explicit interna- 



8o EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 

tional agreements. There was no honor among nations. No state 

had any rights which any other state was bound to respect. These 

monarchs, "enhghtened" and "benevolent" or not, as the case 

^, . might be, all agreed that they ruled by divine right, bv the 

The insecu- ^ '^ ....... . . ^ . . ■ 

rity of will of God. Yet this decidedly imposing origin of their 

^*^'^^ authority gave them no sense of security in their relations with 

each other, nor did it give to their reigns any exceptional purity or 
unworldly character. The maxims of statecraft which they followed 
were of the earth, earthy. While bent upon increasing their own 
power they did not neglect the study of the art of undermining each 
other's power, however divinely buttressed in theory it might be. 
Monarchs were dethroned, states were extinguished, boundaries 
were changed and changed again, as the result of aggressive wars, 
during the eighteenth century. Moreover, the wars of that 

Wars of ag- =' * •' . , . 

gression time Were famous for the exactions of the victors and for the 

numerous scandalous fortuiies made by some of the commaiidcrs. It was 
not the French Revolutionists nor was it Napoleon who introduced 
these customs into Europe. They could not, had they tried, have 
lowered the tone of war or statecraft in Europe. At the worst they 
might only imitate their predecessors. 

HOW THE OLD REGIME WAS UNDERMINED 

The Old Regime in Europe was to be brought tumbling down in 
unutterable confusion as a result of the storm which was brewing in 
France and which we are now to study. But that regime had been 
undermined, the props that supported it had been destroyed, by its 
own official beneficiaries and defenders. The Old Regime was 
disloyal to the very principles on which it rested, respect for the 
established order, for what was old and traditional, for what had 
come down from the past, regard for legality, for engagements, 
among loyalty to those in authority. How little regard the monarchs 

monarchs ^^ Europe themselves had for principles which they were accus- 
tomed to pronounce sacred, for principles in which alone lay their own 
safety, was shown by the part they played in the great events of the 
eighteenth century already alluded to, the war of the Austrian 
grabs Succession, and the Partition of Poland. By the first the ruler 

suesia q£ Austria, Maria Theresa, was robbed of the large and valuable 

province of Silesia by Prussia, aided by France, both of which states 



82 



EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 



The Par- 
tition of 
Poland 



had recently signed a peculiarly solemn treaty called the Prag- 
matic Sanction, by which her rights had been explicitly and emj^hati- 
cally recognized. Frederick II, however, wanted the province, took 
it, and kept it. This case shows how lightly monarchs regarded 
legal obligations, when they conflicted with their ambitions. 

The other case, the Partition of Poland, was the most iniquitous 
act of the century. Poland was in geographical extent the largest 

state in Europe, 

next to Russia. 

Its history ran far 
back. But its govern- 
ment was utterly weak. 
Therefore in 1772 Prussia, 
Austria, and Russia at- 
tacked it for no cause 
save their own greed, 
and tore great fragments 
away, annexing them to 
their own territories. 
Twenty years later they 
completed the process in 
two additional partitions, 
in 1793 and 1795, thus 
entirely annihilating an 
ancient state. This shows 
how much regard the 
monarchs of Europe had 
for established institu- 
tions, for established 
authorities. 

Two things only 
counted in Old Europe — 

force and will, the will of the sovereign. But force and will 

Force, the ^ 

order of the may be used quite as easily for revolution, for the overthrow 
^^^ of what is old and sacred, as for its preservation. There need 

be no surprise at anything that we may find Napoleon doing. 

He had a sufficient pattern and exemplar in Frederick the Great 

and in Catherine of Russia, only recently deceased when his meteoric 

career began. 




Maria Theresa 

From a pastel in the possession of the Grand Duke 
Frederick, Vienna. 



CLIMAX OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 83 

The eighteenth century attained its legitimate dimax in its closing 
decade, a memorable period in the history of the world. The The crash 
Old Regime in Europe was rudely shattered by the overthrow of R/*imf In 
the Old Regime in France, which country, by its astonishing Europe 
actions, was to dominate the next quarter of a century. 

REFERENCES 

Age or William Pitt : Larson, Short History of England, Chap. XXI ; 
Macaulay, Essays, William Pitt, Earl of Chatham. 

William Pitt and the Conquest of Canada : Beard, Introduction to the 
English Historians, pp. 452-465; F. Harrison, Chatham, pp. 94-113; Green, 
Short History of the English People, pp. 745-757. 

The Seven Years' War and the Intjependence of the United States : 
Green, pp. 757-786. 

The Industrial Revolution and the x\merican Revolution : Cheyney, 
Short History of England, pp. 576-596. 

British Colonial Expansion : Seeley, Expansion of England, Lect. IV. 

Frederick William I, the Father of Frederick the Great : Henderson, 
Short History of Germany, II, 87-104; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution 
6f Prussia, pp. loi-iii ; Lavisse, The Youth of Frederick the Great, Chap. II ; 
Carlyle, Frederick the Great, Vol. I, Book IV, Chaps. Ill and IV. 

The Youth of Frederick the Great: Henderson, Vol. II, pp. 111-122; 
Lavisse, The Youth of Frederick the Great; R. P. Dunn Pattison, Leading 
Figures in European History, pp. 329-357; Robinson and Beard, Readings in 
Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 65-67. 

The Wars OF Frederick THE Great : Henderson, Vol. II, Chap. IV; Priest, 
Germany Since 1740, pp. 10-22. 

Frederick the Great in Time of Peace: Henderson, Vol. II, Chap. V; 
Priest, pp. 23-24. 

Frederick the Great ant) the First Partition of Poland : Perkins, 
France under Louis XV, Vol. I, Chap. XXI; Rambaud, The History of Russia, 
Vol. II, pp. 122-130. 

Russia before Peter the Great: Rambaud, Vol. I, Chap. XX; Morfill, 
Story of Russia, Chaps. V and VI. 

Peter the Great's Travels in the West: Oscar Browning, Peter the 
Great, Chaps. X-XII; Motley, Peter the Great, pp. 7-27; Rambaud, Vol. I, 
Chap. XXII. 

Reforms of Peter the Great: Wakeman, The Ascendancy of France, pp. 
299-310; Browning, Peter the Great, Chap. XV; Schuyler, Peter the Great, Vol. 
I, Chap. XXV ; Vol. II, Chaps. LVII and LXIII. 

The Fount)ing of St. Petersburg : Schuyler, Vol. II, Chap. XL VI ; 
Browning, Chap. XX. 



CHAPTER IV 
THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION 

The French Revolution brought with it a new conception of the 
state, new principles of politics and of society, a new outlook upon life, 
a new faith which seized the imagination of multitudes, inspiring j 
them with intense enthusiasm, arousing boundless hopes, and pre- 
cipitating a long and passionate struggle with all those who feared 
or hated innovation, who were satisfied with things as they were, 
who found their own conditions of life comfortable and did 

Attracts 

liberals not wish to be disturbed. Soon France and Europe were 

everywhere (jiyided into two camps, the reformers and the conservatives, 
those believing in radical changes along many lines and those who 
believed in preserving what was old and tried, either because they 
and repels profited by it or because they felt that men were happier and 
conservatives more prosperous in living under conditions and with institu- 
tions to which they were accustomed than under those that might 
be ideally more perfect but would at any rate be strange and novel 
and uncertain. 

RELICS OF FEUDALISM 

In order to understand the French Revolution it is necessary to ex- 
amine the conditions and institutions of France out of which it grew ; 
The Revoiu- i"^ Other words, the Old Regime. Only thus can we get our 
tion a transi- sense of perspective, our standard of values and of criticism, 
feudalism to The Revolution accomplished a sweeping transformation in 
democracy ^^g jj£g ^^ France. Putting it in a single phrase it accom- 
plished the transition from the feudal system of the preceding cen- 
turies to the democratic system of the modern world. The entire 
structure of the French state and of French society was remodeled 
and planted on new and far-reaching principles. 

84 



MONARCHY BY DIVINE RIGHT 85 

The essence of the feudal system was class divisions and acknowl- 
idged privileges for all classes above the lowest. The essence of ^^^^^^.^ of 
he new system is the removal of class distinctions, the aboli- the feudal 
tion of privileges, the introduction of the principle of the ^^^ ^™ 
quality of men, wherever possible. 

What strikes one most in contemplating the Old Regime is the 
jrevalence and the oppressiveness of the privileges that various 
;lasses enjoyed. Society was simply honeycombed with 
;hem. They affected life constantly and at every point. Regime 
[t is not an easy society to describe in a few words, for the ^^^^_^ "^ 

i . privilege 

irariations were almost endless. But, broadly speaking, 
md leaving details aside, French society was graded from top to 
jottom, and each grade differed, in legal rights, in opportunities for 
enjoyment and development, in power. 

The system culminated in the monarch, the lofty and glittering 
jhead of the state, the embodiment of the might and the majesty of the 
ination. The king claimed to rule by the will of God, that is, „, 
by divine right, not at all by the consent of the people. He was divine right 
responsible to no one but God. Consequently in the actual ° ^'^^^ 
o^iuluct of his office he was subject to no control. He was an absolute 
m )narch. He could do as he chose. It was for the nation to obey. 
The will of the king and that alone was, in theory, the only thing that 
counted. It determined what the law should be that should govern 
i twenty-five million Frenchmen in their daily lives. "This thing is 
[legal because I wish it," said Louis XVI, thus stating in a single 
■ phrase the nature of the monarchy, the theory, and the practice 
also, if the monarch happened to be a strong man. The king made 
I the laws, he levied the taxes, he spent them as he saw fit, he de- 
. clared wars, made peace, contracted alliances according to his 
I own inclination. There was in theory no restriction upon his archTbso- 
power, and all his subjects lay in the hollow of his hand. He ^"*® '** 

power 

could seize their property ; he could imprison them by a mere 
order, a /ettre de cachet, without trial, and for such a period as he 
desired ; he could control, if not their thoughts, at least the expres- 
sion of them, for his censorship of the press, whether employed in the 
publication of books or newspapers, could muzzle them absolutely. 
So commanding a figure required a broad and ample stage for the 
part he was to play, a rich and spacious background. Never was a 
being more sumptuously housed. While Paris was the capital of 



86 



THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 




THE SPLENDOR OF VERSAILLES 87 

France, the king resided twelve miles away amid the splendors of 

Versailles. There he lived and moved and had his being in a palace 

which, as we have seen, was the envy of every other king in -j^ j^^^^^ 

Christendom and which furnished an imposing setting for a of his 

most brilliant and numerous court. For the court of Versailles '■^^''^^'''^^ 

(ver-salz') which so dazzled Europe was composed of 18,000 people, 

perhaps 16,000 of whom were attached to the personal service of the 

king and his family, 2000 being courtiers, the favored guests of the 

house, nobles who were engaged in a perpetual round of pleasures 

and who were also busily feathering their own nests by soliciting, 

of course in polished and subtle ways, the favors that streamed from 

a lavish throne. Luxury was everywhere the prevailing note. 

Well may the occupants of the palace have considered themselves, 

in spirit and in truth, the darlings of the gods, for earth had not 

anything to show more costly. The king, the queen, the royal 

children, the king's brothers and sisters and aunts all had their 

separate establishments under the spacious roof. The queen alone 

had 500 servants. The royal stables contained nearly 1900 horses 

and more than 200 carriages, and the annual cost of this service . 

° A most ex- 

alone was the equivalent of $4,000,000. The king's table cost pensive 

more than a million and a half. As gaiety was unconfined, "^"""^ 
so necessarily was the expenditure that kept it going, for every one in 
this household secured what, in the parlance of our vulgar democracy, 
is called a handsome "rake-off." Thus ladies-in-waiting secured 
about $30,000 each by the privilege they enjoyed of selling candles 
that had once been lighted but not used up. Queen Marie Antoinette 
(mar'-i-an-toi-net') had four pairs of shoes a week,, which constituted 
a profitable business for somebody. In 1789 the total cost of all this 
riot of extravagance amounted to not far from $20,000,000. No 
wonder that men spoke of the court as the veritable nation's 
grave. 

Not only were the king's household expenses pitched to this exalted 
scale, but, in addition, he gave money or appointments or pensions 
freely, as to the manner born, to those who gained his favor. It ^^^ ^^ ^ 
has been estimated that in the fifteen years between 1774, lordbounti- 
when Louis XVI came to the throne, and 1789, when the whirl- 
wind began, the King thus presented to favorites the equivalent of 
more than a hundred million dollars of our money. For those who 
basked in such sunshine it was unquestionably a golden age. 



88 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

FRANCE AN ILL-ORGANIZED STATE 

Such was the dazzhng apex of a state edifice that was rickety in the 
extreme. For the government of France was ill-constructed and the 
times were decidedly out of joint. That government was not a 
miracle of design, but of the lack of it. Complicated, ill-adjusted, 
the various branches dimly defined or overlapping, it was thoroughly 




The Coach Ornamented with Symbols in Which Louis XVI Went to His 
Coronation in 1774 

From E. F. Henderson's Symbol and Satire in the French Revolution. 



unscientific and inefficient. The king was assisted by five councils 
which framed the laws, issued the orders, conducted the business 
of the state, domestic and foreign, at the capital. Then for purposes 
The old of local government France was split up into divisions, but, 

provinces unfortunately, not into a single, simple set. There were forty 
"governments," so called, thirty- two of which corresponded closely 
to the old provinces of France, the outcome of her feudal histor}^ 
But those forty "governments" belied their name. They did little 



THE GOVERNMENT OF FRANCE 89 

[[overning, but they furnished many lucrative offices for the higher 
lobiUty who were appointed "governors" and who resided generally 
n Versailles, contributing their part to the magnificent ceremonial 
jf that showy parade ground. 

The real, prosaic work was done in the thirty-six "generalities," as 
another set of divisions was called. Over each of these was an in- 
tendant who was generally of the middle or bourgeois class, accus- 
tomed to work. These intendants were appointed by the king to 
arry on the royal government, each in his own district. They The in- 
jenerally did not originate much, but they carried out the orders tendants 
[that came from the capital and made their reports to it. Their 
power was practically unrestricted. Upon them depended in large 
measure the happiness or the misery of the provinces. Judging 
from the fact that most of them were very unpopular, it must be 
admitted that this, the real working part of the national government, 
did not contribute to the welfare of the people. The intendants 
were rather the docile tools of the misgovernment which issued from 
the five councils which were the five fingers of the king. As the head 
is, so are the members, and the officials under the intendants for the 
smaller local areas enjoyed the disesteem evoked by the oppressive 
or unjust policies of their superiors. 

Speaking broadly, local self-government did not exist in France, but 
the local, like the national, government was directed and determined 
in Versailles. Were a bridge to be repaired over some little „ 
stream hundreds of miles from Paris, were a new roof required seif- 
for a village church, the matter was regulated from Paris, after s^^^'^^ent 
exasperating delay. It was the reign of the red tkpe in every sense 
of the word. The people stood like dumb, driven cattle before this 
monstrous system. The only danger lay in the chance that they 
might not always remain dumb. Here obviously was no school 
for popular political education — a fact which explains many of the 
mistakes and failures of the people when, in the Revolution, they 
themselves undertook to rule, the monarchy having failed egregiously 
to discharge its functions efficiently or beneficently. 

Let no one suppose that because France was a highly centralized 
monarchy, culminating in the person of the king, that therefore the 
French government was a real unity. Nothing could be further from 
the truth. To study in detail the various aspects of the royal gov- 
ernment, its divisions and subdivisions, its standards, its agents, its 



90 



THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 



1 




•• • '~"-y-<<Ml'--'"d M^niTERRAAAy SEA 



FRANCE 

BEFORE THE REVOLUTION 




LACK OF UNITY IN FRENCH INSTITUTIONS 91 

methods of procedure, is to enter a lane where the mind quickly be- 
comes hopelessly bewildered, so great was the diversity in the 
machinery employed, so varied were the terms in use. Uni- 
formity was nowhere to be seen. There was unity in the person centralized 
of the king, necessarily, and there only. Everywhere else dis- ^"* ^°^ 

... • 1 , T , , unified 

unity, diversity, variety, without rhyme or reason. It would 
take a volume or many volumes to make this clear — even then the 
reader would be driven to despair in attempting to form a true mental 
picture of the situation. The institutions of France were a hodge- 
podge — chaos erected into a system, with no loss of the chaotic, 
and with no system. Nowadays the same laws, the same taxes, the 
same weights and measures prevail throughout the length and 
breadth of the land. But in 1789 no such simplicity or equality 
existed. W' eights and measures had different names and different 
values as one moved from province to province, sometimes as one 
moved from village to village. In some provinces taxes were, not 
determined, but at least apportioned, by certain people of the 
province. In other cases this apportionment was effected directly 
by the agents of the king, that is, by the central government. Diversity 
In some parts of France the civil laws, that is, the laws that "* ^^^^ 
regulated the relations of individuals with each other, not with the 
state, were of Roman origin or character. There the written law 
prevailed. In other sections, however, mainly in the north, one 
changed laws, Voltaire (vol-tar') said, as one changed post horses. 
In such sections the laws were not written but were customary, that 
is, feudal in origin and in spirit. There were indeed 285 different 
codes of customary laws in force, that is, 285 different ways of regu- 
lating legally the personal relations of men with men, within the 
confines of France. 

Again the same diversity in another sphere. Thirteen of the prov- 
inces of central France enjoyed free trade, that is, merchandise could 
move freely from one end of that area to the other without ^^^^-^^^-^^^ 
restriction. But the other nineteen provinces were sepa- tariff 
rated from each other, just as nations are, by tariff bound- 
aries, and when goods passed from one such province to another, 
they passed through custom-houses and duties were paid on them, as 
on goods that come from Europe to the United States. 

All these diversities in laws, all these tariff boundaries, are easily 
explained. They were historical survivals, troublesome and irritating 



92 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

reminders of the Middle Ages. As the kings of France had during 
the ages annexed first this province and then that, they had, more 
or less, allowed the local customs and institutions to remain undis- 
turbed. Hence this amazing patchwork which baffles description. 

One consequence of all this was the persistence in France of that 
feeling which in American history is known as the states-rights feeling. 
While all admitted that they were Frenchmen, provincial feeling was 
The states- Strong and frequently assertive. Men thought of them- 
nghts feeling gelvcs as Bretons, as Normans, were attached to the things that 
differentiated them, were inflexible or stubborn opponents of all 
attempts at amalgamation. Before France could be considered 
strongly united, fusion on a grand scale had to be accomplished.. 
This was to be one of the memorable and durable achievements of the 
Revolution. 

UNJUST AND OPPRESSIVE TAXATION 

The financial condition of this extravagant and inefficient state was 
deplorable and dangerous. Almost half of the national income was 

The national devotcd to the payment of interest on the national debt. 

finances Expenditures were always larger than receipts, with the 

result that there was an annual deficit which had to be met. by 
contracting a new loan, thus increasing the debt and the interest 
charges. It appeared to be the principle of state finance, not that 
expenditures should be determined by income, but that income 
should be determined by expenditures. The debt therefore steadily 
grew larger, and to meet the chronic deficit the government was 
forced to resort to well-known methods which only aggravated the 
evil — the sale of offices, new loans. During twelve years of the 
reign of Louis XVI, from 1776 to 1788, the debt increased nearly 
$600,000,000. People became unwilling to loan to the state, and 
it was practically impossible to increase the taxes. The national 
finances were in a highly critical condition. Bankruptcy impended, 
and bankruptcy can be avoided only in two ways, either by increasing 
receipts or by reducing expenditures, or both. Attempts were 
made in the one direction and in the other, but were ineffectual. 

The receipts, of course, came from the taxes, and the taxes were 
already very burdensome, at least for those who paid them. They 
were of two kinds, the direct and the indirect. The direct taxes 
were those on real estate, on personal property, and on income. 



THE SYSTEM OF TAXATION 93 

From some of these the nobles and the clergy were entirely exempt 
and they therefore fell all the more heavily upon the class that 
remained, the third estate. From others the nobles, though ^-^^^^^ ^^^^^ 
not legally exempted, were in practice largely freed because and class 
the authorities did not assess noble property nearly as high '"^'^' ^^^^ 
as they did the property of commoners. Tax assessors stood in awe 
of the great. Thus the royal princes who were subject to the income 
tax and who ought to have paid nearly two and a half million francs, 
as a matter of fact paid less than two hundred thousand. Again, a 
marquis who ought to have paid a property tax of 2,500 francs paid 
400, while a member of the third estate in the same province who 
ought to have paid 70 in realit}^ paid 760. Such crass favoritism, 
which always worked in favor of the nobles, never in favor of mem- 
bers of the third estate, naturally served only deeply to embitter the 
latter class. Those who were the wealthiest and therefore the best 
able to support the state were the very ones who paid the least, 
thus conforming to the principle that to those that have shall be given 
and from those that have not shall be taken away even that which 
they have. It has been estimated that the middle classes, the 
workingmen, and peasants gave up half their annual earnings in the 
form of these direct taxes. 

There was another branch of the system of taxation which was op- 
pressive and offensive for other reasons. There were certain indirect 
taxes which were collected, not by state officials, but by 
private individuals or companies, the farmers of taxes, as taxes unjust 
they were called, who paid a lump sum to the state and then ^^^ 

■' ^ '■ oppressive 

themselves collected the taxes, seeking of course to extract 
as much as possible from the people. Not only has this system of 
tax collecting always proved most hateful, both in ancient and mod- 
ern times, as the tax farmers have always, in order to make as much 
as possible, applied the screws with pitiless severity, thus generating 
a maximum of odium and hatred ; but in this particular case several 
of the indirect taxes would have been unjust and oppressive, even if 
collected with leniency, a thing never heard of. There was, for 
instance, the salt-tax, or gabelle, which came home, in stark xhe odious 
odiousness, to every one. The trade in salt was not open to salt-tax 
any one who might wish to engage in it, but was a monopoly of a 
company which bought the privilege from the state, and that company 
was most astoundingly favored by the law. For every person above 



94 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

seven years of age was required to buy at least seven pounds of salt 
annually whether he wished it or not. Even the utterly poor 
who had not money enough to bu}^ bread, were severely punished 
if they refused or neglected to buy the stated amount of salt. More- 
over the tax collectors had the right to search all houses from top to 
bottom to see that there was no evasion. Illicit trade in this neces- 
sary commodity was incessantly tracked down and severely punished. 
On the very eve of the Revolution it was oflEicially estimated that 
20,000 persons were annually imprisoned and over 500 annually 
condemned to death, or to service in the galleys, which was hardly 
preferable, for engaging in the illegal trade in salt. Moreover by 
an extra refinement in the art of oppression the seven pounds that 
all must buy could be used only for cooking or on the table. If one 
desired to salt down fish or meats for preservation, one must not use 
this particular salt for that purpose, but must buy an additional 
amount. 

There was another equally intolerable tax, the excise on wine. The 
making of wine was a great national industry which had existed for 
The excise centuries, but if ever there was a system calculated to de- 
tax on wine press it, it was the one in vogue in France. Wine was taxed 
all along the line from the producer to the consumer. Taxed at the 
moment of manufacture, taxed at the moment of sale by the producer, 
it was also taxed repeatedly in transportation, — thirty-five or forty 
times for instance, between the south of France and Paris, so that the 
combined taxes amounted in the end to nearly as much as the cost of 
the original production. A trade exposed to such constant and 
heavy impositions could not greatly flourish. 

Again, the taxes both on salt and on wine were not uniform, but 

varied from region to r gion, so that the sense of unjust treatment 

was kept alive every day in the ordinary course of business, 

of Taxatio™ and smuggling was in many cases extremely profitable. This 

unfair and [Y^ ^^j-j^ jgfj to savagc punishments, which only augmented 

arbitrary , . , ,- , ,,-,•• i i 

the universal discontent and entered like iron into the souls 
of men. In the system of taxation, as in the political structure, 
we find everywhere inequality of treatment, privileges, arbitrary 
and tyrannical regulations, coupled with uncertainty from year to 
year, for the regulations were not infrequently changed. No wonder 
that men, even nobles, criticized this fiscal system as shockingly 
unjust and scandalously oppressive. 



THE DIVISIONS OF FRENCH SOCIETY 95 

THE THREE SOCIAL CLASSES 

The social organization of France, also, was far from satisfactory. 
On even the most cursor}^ view many notorious abuses, many intol- 
erable grievances, many irritating or harmful maladjustments, stood 
forth, condemned by reason or by the interest of large sections of 
the population. Forms outworn, and institutions from which the 
life had departed, but whence issued a benumbing influence, hampered 
development in many directions. French society was frankly based 
upon the principle of inequality. There were three classes or 

1 , 1 •!• 11 1-1 TVT Inequality 

orders, the clergy, the nobility, and the third estate. Not between and 
only were the two former classes privileged, that is, placed withm these 
upon a better footing than the last, but it is curious to observe 
how the pervasive principle of unequal rights broke up even the 
formal unity of each of these classes. There was inequality of classes 
and there was also inequality between sections of the same class. 
The two privileged orders were favored in many ways, such as com- 
plete or partial exemption from taxes, or the right themselves to 
tax — the clergy through its right to tithes, the nobility through its 
right to exact feudal dues. Even some of the members of the third 
estate enjoyed privileges denied the rest. There were classes within 
classes. 

Of the 25,000,000 of Frenchmen the clergy numbered about 
130,000, the nobility 140,000, while possibly about as many bourgeois 
as these two combined enjoyed privileges that separated them 
from the mass of their class. Thus the privileged as a whole leged ciTsses 
numbered less than 600,000, while the unprivileged numbered ^ small 

• /• 1 r minonty 

well over 24,000,000. One man m forty therefore belonged 

to the favored minority whose lot was differentiated from that of 

their fellow men by artificial advantages and distinctions. 

The clergy of the Roman Catholic Church formed the first order in 
the state. It was rich and powerful. It owned probably a fifth of 
the land of France. This land yielded a large revenue, and, in The 
ajddition, the clergy exacted tithes on all the agricultural prod- Church 
ucts of the realm. This was in reality a form of national taxation, 
with this difference from the other forms that the proceeds went, not 
to the nation, but to the Church. The Church had still another 
source of income, the dues which it exacted as feudal landlord from 
those to whom it stood in that relation. The total income of this 



96 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

corporation was approximately $100,000,000. Out of this it was the 

duty of the Church to maintain religious edifices and services, to 

support many hospitals and schools, to relieve personal distress 

and the by charity, for there was no such thing in France as organized 

services it pQQj- relief by the state or municipality. Thus the Church 

rendered . . . 

was a state withm the state, performing several functions 
which in most modern societies are performed by the civil authority. 
This rich corporation was relieved from taxation. Although from 
time to time it paid certain lump sums to the national treasury, these 
were far smaller than they would have been had the Church been 
taxed on its property and on its income in the same proportion as 
were the commoners. 

An income so large, had it been wisely and justly expended, might 
have aroused no criticism, for many of the services performed by this 
s eciaifavo organization were essential to the well-being of France. But 
to the higher here as elsewhere in the institutions of the country we find 
c ergy gross favoritism and wanton extravagance, which shocked the 

moral sense of the nation and aroused its indignation, because they 
so completely belied the pretensions to a peculiar sanctity on which the 
Church based its claims to its privileged position. For the organiza- 
tion did not treat its own staff with any sense of fair play. Much 
the larger part of the income went to the higher clergy, that is, 
to the 1 34 bishops and archbishops, and to a small number of abbots, 
canons, and other dignitaries — in all probabl}^ not more than 5000 
or 6000. ecclesiastics. These highly lucrative positions were monopo- 
lized by the younger sons of the nobility, who were eager to accept the 
salaries but not disposed to perform the duties, many of whom. 

The world- . , , • , i ^ ■,■ ■, ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^■r 

liness of the mdeed, resided at court and lived the gay and worldly life, 
higher clergy ^j^j^^ Scarcely anything, save some slight peculiarity of dress, 
to indicate their ecclesiastical character. The morals of many were 
scandalous and their intellectual ability was frequently mediocre. 
They did not consider themselves men set apart for a high and noble 
calling, they did not take their duties seriously — of course there were 
honorable exceptions, yet they were exceptions — but their aims were 
distinctly finite and they conducted themselves as typical men of the 
world, attentive to the problem of self-advancement, devoted to all 
the pleasures, dissipations, and intrigues of Versailles. Some held 
several offices at once, discharging the obligations of none, and enjoy- 
ing princely revenues. The archbishop of Strasburg had an income 



PRIVILEGE WITHIN THE CHURCH 97 

of $300,000 a year and held high court in a splendid palace, entertain- 
ing two hundred guests at a time. Even the saucepans of his 
kitchens were of silver. A hundred and eighty horses were in his 
stables, awaiting the pleasure of the guests. 

A few of the bishops received small incomes, but the average 
among them was over $50,000 a year. They were in the main 
absentees, residing, not in their dioceses, but in Versailles, where 
further plums were to be picked up by the lucky, and where at any 
rate life Was gay. Some of the bishoprics had even become the 
hereditary possessions of certain families, passing from uncle to 
nephew, as in the secular sphere many offices passed from father 
to son. 

On the other hand, the lower clergy, the thousands of parish priests, 
who did the real work of spiritual consolation and instruction, who 
labored faithfully in the vineyard, were wretchedly recom- _. 
pensed. They were sons of the third estate, while their proud of the lower 
and prosperous superiors were sons of the nobility, and they '^ ^^^^ 
were treated as plebeians. With wretched incomes of a few hundred 
francs, they had difficulty in keeping body and soul together. No 
wonder they were discontented and indignant, exclaiming that their 
lot "made the very stones and beams of their miserable dwellings cry 
aloud." No wonder they were bitter against their superiors, who neg- 
lected and exploited them with equal indifference. The privileged 
order of the clergy is thus seen to be divided into two classes, widely 
dissimilar in position, in origin, and in outlook upon life. The parish 
priests came from the people, experienced the hardships and sufferings 
of the people, saw the injustice of the existing system, and sympa- 
thized with plans for its reform. The triumph of the popular 
cause in the early days of the Revolution was powerfully aided by 
the lower clergy, who at critical moments threw in their lot with 
the third estate and against their clerical superiors, who rallied to the 
support of the absolute monarchy which had been so indulgent and 
so lavish to them. A house divided against itself, however, cannot 
permanently endure. 

THE NOBILITY AND ITS SUBDIVISIONS 

• Somewhat similar was the situation of the second order, the 
nobility. As in the case of the clergy, there was here also great 
variety of condition among the members of this order, although 



98 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

all were privileged. There were several subdivisions, clearly enough 
marked. There were two main classes, the nobility of the sword 
The court 3,nd the nobiUty of the robe, that is, the old military nobility 
nobles of feudal origin and the new judicial nobility, which secured 

its rank from the judicial offices its members held. The nobility 
of the sword consisted of the nobles of the court and of the nobles of 
the provinces. The former were few in number, perhaps a thousand, 
but they shone with peculiar brilliancy, for they were the ones who 
lived in Versailles, danced attendance upon the king, vied with each 
other in an eager competition for appointments in the army and 
navy and diplomatic service, for pensions and largesses from the 
royal bounty. These they needed, as they lived in a luxurious 
splendor that taxed their incomes and overtaxed them. Residing 
at court, they allowed their estates to be administered by bailiffs or 
stewards, who exacted all that they could get from the peasantry 
who cultivated them. Everybody was jealous of the nobles of this 
class, for they were the favored few, who practically monopolized 
all the pleasant places in the sun. 

The contrast was striking between them and the hundred thousand 

provincial nobles who for various reasons did not live at court, were 

not known to the king, received no favors, and who yet were 

The pro- . . 

vinciai conscious that in purity of blood, in honorableness of descent 

°°'''®^ and tradition, they were the equals or superiors of those who 

crowded about the monarch's person. Many of them had small 
incomes, some pitifully small. They could cut no figure in the 
world of society, they had few chances to increase their prosperity, 
which, in fact, tended steadily to decrease. Their sons were trained 
for the army, the only noble profession, but could never hope to rise 
very high because all the major appointments went to the assiduous 
suitors of the clique at court. They resided among the peasants 
and in some cases were hardly distinguishable from them, except 
that they insisted upon maintaining the tradition of their class, 
their badge of superiority, a life of leisure. To work was to lose caste. 
This obliged many of them to insist rigorously upon the payment 
of the various feudal dues owed them by the peasantry, some of 
which were burdensome, most of which were irritating. In some 
parts of France, however, as in the Vendee and in Brittany, they 
were sympathetic and helpful in their relations with the peasants 
and were in turn respected by them. 



PRIVILEGE WITHIN THE NOBILITY 



99 



The nobility as a whole enjoyed one privilege which was a serious 
nd unnecessary injury to the peasants, making harder the conditions 
f their lives, always hard enough, namely the exclusive right xhe right 
f hunting, considered the chief noble sport. This meant in °^ hunting 
:.ctual practice that the peasants might not disturb the game, al- 
hough the game was destroying their crops. This was an un- 
nitigated abuse, 

miversally exe- r^^sss*.-^^'^ ^-^ s,. -^ .^^^^,^ --^.i 

■rated by them. 

The odium that 
-ame to be at- 
ached in men's 
ninds to the no- 
jility was chiefly 
tit only for the 
■-elfish and greedy 
minority. The 
provincial nobil- 
ity, like the lower 
clergy, were them- 
selves discon- 
tented with the 
existing order, for 
abundant reasons. 
They might not 
wish a sweeping 
transformation of 
society, but they 
were disposed to 
favor political re- 
forms that would 
at least give all 

within the order an approximately equal chance. They were de- 
voted to the king, but they experienced in their own persons the 
evils of an arbitrary and capricious government which was highly 
partial in its favors. 

There was yet another section of the nobility whose status and 
whose outlook were different still. Manj- offices in France could 
be bought. They and their perquisites became the property of those 




The Parlement of Paris 
After a drawing by Binet. 



100 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

who purchased them and who could transmit them to their children, 
and one of the perquisites that such offices carried was a patent of 
The nobUity nobihty. This was the created nobihty, the nobihty of the 
of the robe robc, SO Called because its most conspicuous members were 
the judges, or members of the higher tribunals ox parlements. These 
judges appeared, in one aspect, as liberals in that as lawyers they 
opposed certain unpopular innovations attempted by the king. 
But in reality as soon as their own privileges were threatened they 
became the stiffest of defenders of many of the most odious abuses 
of the Old Regime. In the opening days of the Revolution the 
third estate found no more bitter opponents than these ennobled 
judges. 

THE THIRD ESTATE 

Such were the two privileged orders. The rest of the population, 
comprising the vast majority of the people, was called the third 
estate. Differing from the others in that it was unprivileged, it 
resembled them in that it illustrated the principle of inequality, 
as did they. There were the widest extremes in social and economic 
conditions. Every one who was not a noble or a clergyman was 
a member of the third estate, the richest banker, the most illustrious j 
man of le'tters, the poorest peasant, the beggar in the streets. Not 
at all homogeneous, the three chief divisions of this immense mass 
were the bourgeoisie (boor-zhwa-ze'), the artisans, and the peasants. 
The bourgeoisie, or upper middle class, comprised all those who 
were not manual laborers. Thus lawyers, physicians, teachers, 
The hour- literary men, were bourgeois ; also merchants, bankers, manu- 
geoisie facturers. Despite great national reverses, the bourgeoisie 

had grown richer during the eighteenth century as commerce had 
greatly increased. This economic growth had benefited the bour- 
geoisie almost exclusively, and many large fortunes had been built 
up, and the general level of material welfare had been distinctly 
raised. Bourgeois were the practical business men who loaned money 
to the state and who were frequently appointed to offices where 
business ability was required. Intelligent, energetic, educated, 
wUhthe S'l^d well-to-do, this class resented most keenly the existing 

existing system. For its members were made to feel in numerous 

svstGm 

galling ways their social inferiority, and, conscious that they l 
were quite as well educated, quite as well mannered as the nobles," 



THE THIRD ESTATE 



lOI 



they returned the disdain of the latter with envy and hatred. Hav- 
ing loaned immense sums to the state, they were increasingly anxious, 
as they saw it verging rapidly toward bankruptcy. They favored 
therefore a political reorganization which should enable them jj^gj^gg m 
to participate in the government, to control its expenditures, icai and so- 
to assure its solvency, that thus they might be certain of their '^'^ '^ *"^"^ 
interest and principal, that thus abuses which impeded or injured 
business might be redressed, and that the precariousness of their 
position might be remedied. 

They wished also a social revolution. Well educated, saturated 
with the literature of the period, which they read with avidity, their 
minds fermented with the 
itlcas of Voltaire, Rousseau 
(ro-so'), Montesquieu (moh- 
tes-kye'), and the economists. 
Personally, man for man, they 
were as cultivated as the 
nobles. They wished social 
equality, they wished the laws 
to recognize what they felt the 
facts proved, that the bour- 
geois was the equal of the 
noble. They chafed under 
pretensions which they felt 
unjustified by any real su- 
periority. Their mood was 
brilliantly expressed by a 
pamphlet written by one of 
their members. Abbe Siej^es, 
which circulated enormously 
on the eve of the Revolution. 
"What is the Third Estate?" asked Sieyes. 
has it been in politics until now ? Nothing. 
To become something." 

Belonging to this estate but beneath the bourgeoisie were the 
artisans — perhaps two million and a half, living in the towns and 
cities. They were a comparatively small class because the The artisans 
industrial life of France was not yet highly developed. They ^^^ guilds 
were generally organized in guilds, which had their rules and priv- 




SlEYES 

From an engraving by Fiesinger, after a draw- 
ing by J. Guerin. 



"Everything. What 
What does it desire? 



102 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

ileges that gave rise to bickerings galore and that were generally 
condemned as preventing the free and full expansion of industry 
and as artificially restricting the right to work. 

The other large division of the third estate was the peasantry. 
This was by far the largest section. Indeed it was the nation. 
The peas- France was an agricultural country, more than nine-tenths 
^'^^'^y of the population were peasants, more than 20,000,000. 

About a million of them were serfs, the rest were free men, yet their 
lot was an unhappy one. The burdens of society fell with crushing 
weight upon them. They paid fifty-five per cent of what they 
were able to earn to the state, according to the sober estimate 
of Turgot. They paid tithes to the clergy and numerous and 
vexatious feudal dues to the nobles. The peasant paid tolls to 
the seigneur for the use of the roads and bridges. When he sold 
his land he paid a fee to the former seigneur. He was compelled 
to use the seigneur's wine press in making his wine, the seigneur's 
mill, the seigneur's oven, always paying for the service. The loss of 
money was one aspect of the business, the loss of time another. In 
some cases, for instance, the mill was four or five hours distant, and a 
dozen or more rivers and rivulets had to be crossed. In summer, 
even if the water was too low to turn the wheel, nevertheless the 
Heavily peasant was obliged to bring his grain to be ground, must wait 

taxed perhaps three days or must pay a fee for permission to have the 

grain ground elsewhere. Adding what he paid to the king, the 
Church, and the seigneur, and the salt and excise duties, the total 
was often not far from four-fifths of his earnings. With the remain- 
ing one-fifth he had to support himself and family. 

The inevitable consequence was that he lived on the verge of 
disaster. Bad weather at a critical moment supervening, he faced 
and dire want, even starvation. It happened that the harvest 

discontented ^^s bad in 1 788 and that the following winter was cruelly 
severe. According to a foreign ambassador water froze almost 
in front of the fireplace. It need occasion no surprise that owing 
to such conditions hundreds of thousands of men became beggars 
or brigands, driven to frenzy by hunger. It has been estimated 
that in Paris alone, with a population of 650,000, there were nearly 
120,000 paupers. No wonder there were abundant recruits for riots 
and deeds of violence. The 20,000,000 peasants, who knew nothing 
of statecraft, who were ignorant of the destructive and subversive 



RESTRICTIONS UPON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY 103 

theories of Voltaire and Rousseau, were nevertheless daily and hourly 
impressed with the imperative necessity of reforms by the hard 
circumstances of their lives. They knew that the feudal dues would 
have to be abolished, that the excessive exactions of the state would 
have to be reduced before their lives could become tolerable. Their 
reasons for desiring change were different from those of the other 
classes, but it is evident that they were more than sufficient. 

The combined demand for reform, expressed by various classes of 
the population, increased as time went on, and swelled in volume 
and in intensity. The voice of the people spoke with no uncertain 
sound. 

Such was the situation. On the eve of the Revolution Frenchmen 
enjoyed no equality of status or opportunity but privileges of the most 
varied kinds divided them from each other. 

They also enjoyed no liberty. Religious liberty was lacking. 
Since the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685 Protestantism 
had been outlawed. It was a crime punishable with hard labor j^gst^ctions 
to practise that religion. Under Louis XVI the persecution upon religious 
of Protestants was in fact suspended, but it might be resumed ' "*^ 
at any moment. Protestant preaching was forbidden and conse- 
quently could occur only in secret or in. lonely places. Jews were 
considered foreigners and as such were tolerated, but their position 
was humiliating. Catholics were required by law to observe the 
requirements and usages of their religion, communion, fast days. 
Lent. The Church was absolutely opposed to toleration and 
because of this incurred the animosity of Voltaire. 

There was no liberty of thought, or at least, of .the expression of it. 
Every book, every newspaper article must be submitted to the censor 
for approval before publication, and no printer might print ^, 
without permission. Even when published in conformity intellectual 
with these conditions books might be seized and burned by ' ^ ^ 
the police, editions destroyed when possible, and publishers, authors, 
readers might be prosecuted and fined or imprisoned. Let no one 
think that the mere fact that Rousseau, Voltaire, and the other 
authors of the day were able to get their thoughts before the public 
proves that liberty existed in practice, even if not in theory. Voltaire 
knew imprisonment for what he wrote and was virtually exiled during 
long years of his life. The censorship was applied capriciously but 
it was applied sufficiently often, and prosecutions were sufficiently 



104 



THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 




^ 2 



ABSENCE OF POLITICAL LIBERTY 105 

numerous to justify the statement that hberty was lacking in this 
sphere of life. 

There was no individual liberty. The authorities might arrest any 
one whom they wished and keep him in prison as long as they chose 
without assigning reasons and without giving the victim any nq civil 
chance to prove his innocence. There was no such thing as a ''^erty 
Habeas Corpus law. There was a large number of state prisons, 
the most famous being the Bastille, and many of their occupants 
were there by reason of lettres de cachet, or orders for arbitrary 
arrest, one of the most odious and hated features of the Old Regime. 
Ministers and their subordinate officials used these letters freely. 
Nobles easily obtained them, sometimes the place for the name 
being left blank for them to fill in. Sometimes, even, they were 
sold. Thus there was abundant opportunity to use them to pay 
off merely personal grudges. Malesherbes (mal-zarb') once said to 
Louis XVI : " No citizen of your realm is sure of not seeing his liberty 
sacrificed to private spite, the spirit of revenge : for no one is so great 
as to be safe from the hatred of a minister, so little as to be unworthy 
of that of a clerk." Lettres de cachet were also used as a measure of 
family discipline, to buttress the authority of the head of the family, 
which was quite as absolute as it is in the Orient. A father could 
have his wife imprisoned or his children, even though they were 
adults. Mirabeau had this experience even when he was already 
widely known as a writer on public affairs. 

Nor was there political liberty. The French did not have the right 
to hold public meetings or to form associations or societies. And of 
course, as we have seen, they did not elect any assemblies . 

' ' •' -^ and no 

to control the royal government. Liberties which had been political 
in vogue in England for centuries, which were the priceless ' 
heritage of the English race on both sides of the Atlantic, were 
unknown in France. 

In view of all these facts it is not strange that Liberty and Equality 
became the battle cry of the Revolution, embodying the deepest 
aspirations of the nation. 

INFLUENCE OF LITERARY MEN 

The French Revolution has been frequently ascribed to the influ- 
ence of the "philosophers" or writers of the eighteenth century. 
This is putting the cart before the horse, not the usual or efficient 



io6 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

way of insuring progress. The manifold ills from which the nation 
suffered only too palpably were the primary cause of the demand for 
a cure. 

Nevertheless it was a fact of great importance that all the condi- 
tions described above, and many others, were criticized through the 
century by a group of brilliant writers, whose exposition and 
fr"*tu denunciation gave vocal expression on a vast scale to the dis- 

of the content, the indignation, and the longing of the age. Litera- 

century*^* ture was a lusty and passionate champion of reform, and 
through it a flood of new ideas swept over France. Many of 
these ideas were of foreign origin, German, American, above all 
English ; many were of native growth. Literature was political, 
and never was there such a raking criticism, from every angle, of 
prevalent ideas. It was skeptical and expressed the greatest con- 
tempt for the traditional — that is, for the very basis on which 
France uneasily rested. It was analytical, ideas and institutions 
and methods being subjected to the most minute and exhaus- 
The critical |-jyg examination. Literature was optimistic, and never did 

philosophy, . . . \ , . ^_ . 

destructive a nation Witness so luxuriant or tropical a growth of Utopias 
*"*** , .• and dreams. It was a literature of criticism, of denunciation, 

constructive ' 

of ingenious or futile suggestions for a fairer future. It was 
destructive, as has often been said. It was constructive, too, a 
characteristic which has not so often been noted. These books, 
which issued in such profusion from the facile pens and teeming 
brains of Montesquieu, Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot (de'-dro'), 
Quesnay (ka'-na'), and many others, stirred the intellectual world to 
its depths. They accelerated the circulation of multifarious ideas on 
politics, religion, society, business. They constituted great historic 
acts. They crystallized in brilliant and sometimes blinding formulas 
and theorems whole philosophies of the state and of society. In such 
compact and manageable form they made the tour of France and 
began the tour of Europe. 

The volume of this inflammatory literature was large, its impetus 
tremendous. It exhaled the love of liberty, the craving for justice. 
Liberal ideas penetrated more and more deeply into the public mind. 
A vast fermentation, an incessant and fearless discussion of existing 
evils and their remedies, prepared the way for coming events which 
were to prove of momentous character. 

For three generations the fire of criticism and satire rained upon the 



THE WRITINGS OF MONTESQUIEU 



107 



foundations of the French monarchy. The campaign was opened by 
Montesquieu, a member of the nobility of the robe, a lawyer of 
eminence, a judge of the Parlement of Bordeaux (bor-do'). ^ 
His great work, the product of twenty years of labor, was his quieu 
Spirit of Laws, published in 1748. It had an immediate and ^'^^^"'^^ss) 
immense success. Twenty-two editions issued from the press in 
eighteen months. It was a study in political philosophy, an analysis 

of the various forms of gov- 
ernment known to men, a 
cold and balanced judgment 
of their various peculiarities, 
merits, and defects. Tearing 
aside the veil of mystery 
which men had thrown about 
their institutions, disregard- 
ing contemptuously the claim 
of a divine origin, Montes- 
quieu examined the various 
types with the same detach- 
ment and objectivity which 
a botanist shows in the study 
of his specimens. Two or 
three leading ideas "The Spirit 
emerged from the pro- °^ ^^^^ " 
cess. One was that the Eng- 
lish government was on the 
whole the'bcst, since it guaran- 
teed personal liberty to all 
citizens. It was a monarchy 
which was limited in power, and controlled by an assembly which 
represented the people of England — in other words what, . 
in the language of modern political science, is called a constitutional 
constitutional monarchy. Montesquieu also emphasized the ™°°^''*=^y 
necessity in any well-regulated state of separating carefully the 
three powers of government, the legislative, the executive, and 
the judicial. In the French monarchy all were blended and th^th?e*J^** 
fused in the single person of the king, and were subject to no powers of 
control. These conceptions of a constitutional as preferable 
to an absolute monarchy, and of the necessity of providing for 




Montesquieu 

From the engraving by B. L. Henriquez after 
the picture at the Academie Frangaise. 



government 



io8 



THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 



a separation of the three powers, have dominated all the constitutions 

France has had since 1789 and have exerted an influence far beyond 

the boundaries of that country. 

Very different, but even more memorable, was the work of Voltaire, 

one of the master minds of European history, whose name has become 
Voltaire the name of an 

(1694-1788) era. We speak of 

the Age of Voltaire as 

we speak of the Age of 

Luther and of Erasmus. 

Voltaire stands for the 

emancipation of the in- 
tellect. His significance 

to his times is shown in 

the title men gave him 

— King Voltaire. The 

world has not often seen 

a freer or more intrepid 

spirit. Supremely gifted 

for a life of letters, 

Voltaire proved himself 

an accomplished poet, 

historian, dramatist, 

even scientist. Well 

known at the age of 

twenty-three, he died at 

the age of eighty-four in 

a veritable delirium of 

applause, for his exit 

from the world was 

an amazing apotheosis. 

World-renowned he 

melted into world his- 
tory. 
Voltaire was a warrior all his life, for multifarious and generally 

honorable causes. With many weaknesses of character, of which 
A champion excessive vanity was one, he was a pillar of cloud by day and of 
of freedom f^j-g by night for all who enlisted in the fight for the liberation 

of mankind. He had personally experienced the oppression of 




Voltaire 
From the bust by Houdon. 



THE INFLUENCE OF VOLTAIRE 109 

the Old Regime and he hated it with a deep and abiding hatred. 
He had more than once been thrown into prison by the odious, 
arbitrary lettres de cachet because he had incurred the enmity of the 
great. A large part of his life had been spent in exile because he 
was not safe in France. By his prodigious intellectual activ- 
ity he had amassed a large fortune and had become one of the of every 
powers of Europe. Show him a case of arbitrary injustice, form of 

, ,. . . , ,. . ' tyranny 

a case of religious persecution hounding an innocent man to an 
awful death — and there were such cases — and you would see him 
taking the field, aflame with wrath against the authors of the mon- 
strous deed. Voltaire was never tiresome, he was always interesting, 
and he was generally instructive. The buoyancy of his spirit was 
Shown in everything he wrote. A master of biting satire and of 
pulverizing invective, he singled out particularly for his attention 
the hypocrisies and cruelties and bigotries of his age and he^ raked 
them with a rapid and devastating fire. This brought him into 
conflict with the State and the Church. He denounced the abuses 
and iniquities of the laws and the judicial sj^stem, of arbitrary im- 
prisonment, of torture. 

' Voltaire was not primarily a political thinker. He attacked indi- 
vidual abuses in the state and he undermined the respect for author- 
ity, but he evidently was satisfied with monarchy as an institution. 
His ideal of government was a benevolent despotism. He was not a 
democrat. He would rather be ruled by one lion than by a hundred 
rats, was the way in which he expressed his preference. 

The Church was his chief aversion, as he considered it the gloomy 
fastness of moldering superstitions, the enemy of freedom of thought, 
the persecutor of innocent men who differed from it, as the seat 
of intolerance, as the supporter of all kinds of narrow and ^^^ 

,. , ... ^^ . . ,. TTi attacks upon 

bigoted prejudices. Voltaire was not an atheist. He be- the Church 
lieved in God, but he did not believe in the Christian or in the 
Hebrew God, and he hated the Roman Catholic Church and he 
constantly attacked it. In eighteenth-century France the Church, 
as we have seen, presented plenty of vulnerable sides for his fiery 
shafts. 

Very different in tone and tendency was the work of another 
author, Jean Jacques Rousseau. In Voltaire we have the Rousseau 
dry, white light, of reason thrown upon the dark places of the (1712-1778) 
world. In Rousseau we have reason, or rather logic, charged with 



THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 



emotion. If the former was primarily engaged in the attempt to de- 
stroy, the latter was constructive, imaginative, prophetic. Rousseau 
was the creator of an entire political system ; he was the confident 
theorist of a new organization of society. Montesquieu and Voltaire 

desired political re- 
forms in the interest 
of individual liberty, 
desired the end of 
tyranny. But Rous- 
seau swept far be- 
yond them, desiring 
a total reorganization 
of society, because no 
amount of patching 
and renovating could 
make the present sys- 
tem tolerable, be- 
cause nothing less 
would render liberty 
possible. He wrote 
a magic prose, rich, 
sonorous, full of mel- 
ancholy, full of color, 
of musical cadences, 
of solemn and pensive 
eloquence. The past 
had no power over 
him ; he lacked com- 
pletely the histori- 
cal sense. The past, 
indeed, he despised. 
It was to him the 
enemy par excellence, 
the cause of all the multiplied ills from which humanity was suffer- 
ing and must free itself. Angry with the world as it was — his own 
life had been hard — he, the son of a Genevan watchmaker, had 
wandered here and there practicing different trades, valet, music- 
teacher, tutor — he had known misery and had no personal reason 
for thinking well of the world and its boasted civilization. In his 




Jean Jacques Rousseau 
From an engraving by J. E. Nochez after A. Ramsay. 



THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF ROUSSEAU iii 

first work he propounded his fundamental thesis that man, naturally 
good and just and happy, had been corrupted and degraded by 

, 1 • 11 1 • •!• • rr^i r • •!■ Condemns 

the very thing he called civilization. Therefore sweep civihza- the civiiiza. 
tion aside, and on the ground freed from its artificial and bane- i\°°jj°^ 
ful conventions and institutions erect the idyllic state. 

Rousseau's principal work was his Social Contract, one of the most 
famous and in its results one of the most influential books ever written. 
Opening with the startling statement that "man was born " The Social 
free and is everjrwhere in chains," he proceeded to outline Contract" 
a purely ideal state, which was in complete contrast to the one in 
which he lived. Society rests only upon an agreement of the persons 
who compose it. The people are sovereign, not any individual, nor 
any class. All men are free and equal. The purpose of any govern- 
ment should be to preserve the rights of each. Rousseau did not 
at all agree with Montesquieu, whose praise of the English Criticizes 
form of government as insuring personal liberty he considered foi^of'*^'* 
fallacious. "The English think themselves free," he said, government 
"but they are mistaken, for they are free only at the moment in 
which they elect the members of Parliament." As soon as these are 
chosen, the people are slaves, they are nothing, since the members of 
Parliament are rulers, not the people. Only when the next election 
comes round will they be free again, and then only for another 
moment. Rousseau repudiated the representative system of gov- 
ernment and demanded that the people make the laws themselves 
directly. Government must be government by majorities. Rous- 
seau's state made no provision for safeguarding any rights of the 
minority which the majority might wish to infringe. The harmful 
feature of his system was that it rendered possible a tyranny by a 
majority over a minority quite as complete and odious and unre- 
strained as any tyranny of a king could be. 

Two of his ideas stood out in high relief — the sovereignty of 
the people and the political equality of all citizens, two democratic 
principles which were utterly subversive of the states of „ 

•^ i ■> ... Rousseau s 

Europe as then constituted. These principles powerfully in- democratic 
iluenced the course of the Revolution and have been preached i"'"*"p'^s 
with fervor and denounced with passion by rival camps ever since. 
They have made notable progress in the world since Rousseau gave 
them thrilling utterance, but they have still much ground to traverse 
before they gain the field, before the reign of democracy everywhere 
prevails. 



112 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 

There were many other writers who, by attacking this abuse and 
that, contributed powerfully to the discrediting, the sapping of the 
Old Regime. A conspicuous group of them busied themselves 
prevailing with economic studies and theories, enunciating principles 
economic which, if applied, would revolutionize the industrial and 
commercial life of the nation by sweeping away the numerous 
and formidable restrictions which hampered it and which permeated 
it with favoritism and privilege, and by introducing the maximum 
of liberty in commerce, in industry, in agriculture, just as the writers 
whom we have described enunciated principles which would revolu- 
tionize France politically and socially. 

All this seed fell upon fruitful soil. Remarkable was to be the 
harvest, as we shall shortly see. 

The Revolution was not caused by the philosophers, but by the 
conditions and evils of the national life and by the mistakes of the 
government. Nevertheless these writers were a factor in the Revo- 
lution, for they educated a group of leaders, instilled into them 
^, . „ certain decisive doctrines, furnished them with phrases, formu- 

The influ- ^ 

ence of the las, and arguments, gave a certain tone and cast to their minds, 
the*ei\°^ imparted to them certain powerful illusions, encouraged an 
eenth cen- exccssive hopcfulness which was characteristic of the move- 
""^^ ment. They did not cause the Revolution, but they exposed 

the causes brilliantly, focused attention upon them, compelled 

discussion, and aroused passion. 



REFERENCES 

The King, the Administration, and the Court : Lowell, The Eve of the 
French Revolution, Chaps. I and II ; Mathews, The French Revolution, Chap. I ; 
Perkins, France under the Regency, pp. 1 29-141; Taine, Ancient Regime, pp. 
86-124; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, Chap. II. 

Taxation and Finance : Lowell, pp. 207-242 ; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. VIII, pp. 66-78. 

The Privileged and Unprivileged Classes : Mathews, Chaps. II and IV ; 
Lowell, Chaps. Ill, VI, and XIII. 

The Intluence of Men of Letters : Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the 
Revolution, pp. 1 70-1 81; Mathews, Chap. V; Morley, Voltaire, Chaps. I and 
V; Lowell, pp. 274-302. 



CHAPTER V 

BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

Under Louis XVI the financial situation of France became more 
and more serious, until it could no longer be ignored. The cost of the 
participation in the American Revolution, added to the enor- 
mous debt inherited from the reigns of Louis XIV and Louis XV condUion of 
and to the excessive and unregulated expenditures of the state *^e national 
and the wastefulness of the court, completed the derangement 
of the national finances and foreshadowed bankruptcy. In the end 
this crisis forced the monarch to make an appeal to the people by 
summoning their representatives. 

But before taking so grave a step, the consequences of which were 
incalculable, the government tried various expedients less drastic, 
which, however, for various reasons failed. Louis XVI was the Louis xvi 
unhappy monarch under whom these long accumulating ills (^ 754- 1793) 
culminated. The last of the rulers of the Old Regime, his reign 
covered the years from 1774 to 1792. It falls into three periods, a 
brief one of attempted reform (i 774-1 776) and then a relapse for the 
next twelve years into the traditional methods of the Bourbon mon- 
arch}^ and after that the hurricane. 

CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XVI 

During his youth no one thought that Louis would ever be monarch ; 
so many other princes stood between him and the throne that his suc- 
cession was only a remote contingency. But owing to an un- 
precedented number of deaths in the direct line this contin- i^ the arts 
gency became reality. Louis mounted the throne, from °^ govern- 
which eighteen years later, by a strange concourse of events, he 
was hurled. He had never been molded for the high and dangerous 
office. He was twenty years old and the Queen, Marie Antoinette, 
but nineteen when they heard of the death of Louis XV, and in- 
stinctively both expressed the same thought, "How unhappy are 

113 



114 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 



^^ 



'i. '% 




Louis XVI 
From the engraving by Nargeot, after the painting by Callet. 

we! We are too young to rule." The new King was entirely un- 
trained in the arts of government. He was good, well-intentioned, he 
had a high standard of morality and duty, a genuine desire to serve 



CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XVI 115 

his people. But his mind lacked all distinction, his education had 
been poor, his processes of thought were hesitating, slow, uncertain. 
Awkward, timid, without elegancies or graces of mind or bodj', no 
king could have been less to the manner born, none could have seemed 
more out of place in the brilliant, polished, and heartless court of 
which he was the center. This he felt himself, as others felt it, and 
he often regretted, even before the Revolution, that he could not 
abdicate and pass into a private station which would have been far 
more to his taste. He was an excellent horseman, he was excessively 
fond of hunting, he practiced with delight the craft of locksmith. 
He was ready to listen to the advice of wiser men, but, and this was 
his fatal defect, he was of feeble will. He had none of the masterful 
qualities necessary for leadership. He was quite unable to see where 
danger lay and where support was to be found. He was not unintel- 
ligent, but his intelligence was unequal to his task. He was a poor 
judge of men, yet was greatly influenced by them. . He gave way now 
to this influence, which might be good, now to that, which might be 
bad. He was, by nature, like other princes of his time, a reforming 
monarch, but his impulses in this direction were intermittent. At 
the beginning of his reign Louis XVI was subject to the influence of 
Turgot (tiir-go'), one of the wisest of statesmen. Later he was sub- 
ject to that of the Queen — to his own great misfortune and also to 
that of France. 

MARIE ANTOINETTE (i75S-i793) 

The influence of women was always great in France under the Bour- 
bon monarchy, and Marie Antoinette was no exception to the rule. 
Furthermore that influence was frequenth^ disastrous, and here again 
in the case of the last queen of the Old Regime there was no exception. 
If the King proved inferior to his position, the Queen proved no less 
inferior to hers. She was the daughter of the great Empress Maria 
Theresa of Austria, and she had been married to Louis XVI in the 
hope that thus an alliance would be cemented between the two 
states which had so long been enemies. But, as many Frenchmen 
disliked everj^thing about this alliance, she was unpopular and 
exposed to much harsh criticism from the moment she set foot in 
France. She was beautiful, gracious, and vivacious. She possessed 
in large measure some of the very qualities the King so conspicuously 
lacked. She had a strong will, power of rapid decision, a spirit of 



Ii6 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 




MARIE ANTOINETTE 117 

initiative, daring. But she was lacking in wisdom, in breadth of 
judgment; she did not understand the temperament of the French 
people or the spirit of the times. Born to the purple, her outlook 
upon life did not transcend that of the small and highly privileged 
class to which she belonged. 

She had grown up in Vienna, one of the gayest capitals of Europe. 
Her education was woefully defective. When she came to France 
to become the wife of Louis XVI, she hardly knew how to „ ^i 
write. She had had tutors in everything, but they had defectivjL 
availed her little. She was willful and proud, unthinking ^ducatio^ 
and extravagant, intolerant of disagreeable facts, frivolous, impatient 
of all restraint, fond of pleasure and of those who ministered unto it. 
She committed many indiscretions both in her conduct and in the 
kind of people she chose to have about her. Because of these she 
was grossly calumniated and misjudged. 

Marie Antoinette was the center of a group of rapacious people who 
benefited by existing abuses, who were opposed to all reform. Quite 
unconsciously she helped to aggravate the financial situation and thus 
to hasten the catastrophe. 



IMPEXDIfyG BANKRUPTCY 

At the beginning of his reign Louis intrusted the management of 
finances to a man of rare ability and courage, Turgot. Turgot 
had been intendant of one of the poorest provinces of France. 
By applying there the principles of the most advanced econo- Turgot, 
mists, which may be summed up as demanding the utmost •=°^t''°'ie'^ 

' - "^ ^ of finance 

liberty for industry and trade, the abolition of all artificial (1774-1776) 
restrictions and all minute and vexatious governmental regulations, .. 
he had made his province prosperous. He now had to face the '. 
problem of the large annual deficit. The continuance of annual 
deficits could mean nothing else than ultimate bankruptcy. Turgot 
announced his program to the King in tl^words, "No bankruptcy, 
no increase of taxation, no more borro^nn|>J' He hoped to jj; 
extricate the national finances by two processes, by effecting financial 
economies in expenditures, and by developing public wealth so ^° "^^ 
that the receipts would be larger. The latter object would be 
achieved by introducing the regime of liberty into agriculture, in- 
dustry, and commerce. 



Ii8 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

Turgot was easily able to save many millions by suppressing useless 
expenditures, but in so doing he offended all who enjoyed those 
Economic sinecures, and they flew to arms. The trade in foodstuffs was 
reforms hopelessly and dangerously hampered by all sorts of artificial 

and pernicious legislation and interference by the state. All this 
he swept aside, introducing free trade iti grain. A powerful class 
of speculators was thus of^nded. He abolished the trade guilds, 
which restricted production^ by-' limiting the number of workers in 
each line, and by guarding jealously the narrow, inelastic monopolies 
they had established. Their abolition was desirable, but all the 
masters of the guilds and corporations became his bitter enemies. 
Turgot abolished an odious tax, the royal corvee, which required the 
peasants to work without pay on the public roads. Instead, he 
provided that all sucRN^i\^ould be paid for and that a tax to that 
end should be levied upon all landowners, whether belonging to the 
privileged or the unprivileged classes. The former were resolved 
that this should not be, this odious equality of all before the tax- 
„. . collector. Thus all those who battened and fattened off the old 

His enemies . _ 

force his system combined in merciless opposition to Turgot, and, reen- 

dismissai forced by the parlements particularly, and by Marie Antoinette, 
they brought great pressure upon the King to dismiss the obnoxious 
minister. Louis yielded and dismissed the ablest supporter the 
throne had. Both monarchs were grievously at fault, the King 
for his lack of will, the Queen for her willfulness. "M. Turgot and 
I are the only persons who love the people," said Louis XVI, but 
he did not prove his love by his acts. A few days earlier Turgot 
had written him, "Never forget, your Majesty, that it was weakness 
which brought Charles I to the block." 

This incident threw a flood of light upon the nature of the Old 
egime. All reformers were given warning by the fall of Turgot. 
No changes that should affect the privileged classes ! As 
directo'rof the national finances could be made sound only by reforms 
the finances which would affect those classes, there was no way out. Re- 
form was blocked. Necker, a Genevan banker, succeeded 
Turgot. He was a man who had risen by his own efforts from 
poverty to great wealth. He, too, encountered opposition the 
His financial instant he proposed economies. He took a step which in- 
report furiated the members of the court. He published a financial 

report, showing the income and the expenditures of the state. This 




NECKER'S FINANCIAL REPORT 



119 




-ia 



-"MiClAi, 






Marie Antoinette 
From the engraving by Geile, after the painting by Vigee le Brun. 

had never been done before, secrecy having hitherto prevailed in 
such matters. The court was indignant that such high mysteries 
should be revealed to the masses, particularly as the report showed 



120 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

just how much went annually in pensions to the courtiers, as free 
gifts for which they rendered no services whatever. For such 
unconscionable audacity Necker was overthrown, the King weakly 
yielding once more to pressure. 

This time the court took no chances, but secured a minister quite 
according to its taste, in Calonne (ka-lon'). No minister of linance 
could be more agreeable. Calonne's purpose was to please, 
controller ^^^d please he did, for a while. The members of the court had 
general Only to make their wishes known to have them gratified. 

Calonne, a man of charm, of wit, of graceful address, had 
also a philosophy of the gentle art of spending which was highly ap- 
preciated by those about him. ' ' A man who wishes to borrow must ap- 
pear to be rich, and to appear rich he must dazzle by spending freely." 
Money flowed like water during these halcyon times. In three years, 
in a time of profound peace, Calonne borrowed nearly $300,000,000. 
It seemed too good to be true, and it was, by far. The evil days 
drew nigh for an accounting. It was found in August, 1786, that 
the treasury was empty and that there were no more fools 
general tax willing to loan to the state. It was a rude awakening from 
to avert state ^ blissful dream. But Calonne now showed, what he had not 

bankruptcy 

shown before, some sense, He proposed a general tax which 
should fall upon the nobles as well as upon the commoners. It 
was therefore his turn to meet the same opposition from the privileged 
classes which Turgot and Necker had met. He, too, was balked, and 
resigned. 

SUMMONING OF THE STATES-GENERAL, 1789 

His successor, Lomenie de Brienne, encountered a similar fate. As 
there was nothing to do but to propose new taxes, he proposed them. 
The parlement of Paris immediately protested and demanded the con- 
vocation of the States-General, asserting the far-reaching principle 
that taxes can only be imposed by those who are to pay them. The 
King attempted to overawe the parlement, which, in turn, defied the 
King. All this, however, was no way to fill an empty treasury. 
Finally the government yielded and summoned the States-General 
Necker to meet in Versailles on May i, 1789. A new chapter, of in- 

recaiied calculable possibilities, was opened in the history of France. 

Necker was recalled to head the ministry, and preparations for the 
coming meeting were made. 






iv' 






'1 r 

'"* < ' nil 









»^o.«>f 



>; 




iF 



Co ^% InorP^Ku'"'"' 



•.^' 



k/' 



.^■" 



( 






'r 










THE STATES-GENERAL 



The States-General, or assembly representing the three estates of 
the realm, the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners, was an old 
institution in France, but one that had never developed as had 

The States- 

the parliament of England. The last meeting, indeed, had General a 
been held 17s years before. The institution might have feudal 

' ^ -^ ^ institution 

been considered dead. Now, in a great national crisis, it 
was revived, in the hope that it might pull the state out of the 
deplorable situation into 
which the Bourbon mon- 
archy had plunged it. 
But the States-General 
was a thoroughly feudal 
1 institution and France 
was tired of feudalism. 
Its organization no 
longer conformed to the 
wishes or needs of the 
nation. Previously each 
one of the three estates 
had had an equal num- 
ber of delegates, and the 
delegates of each state 
had met separately. It 
was a three-chambered 
body, with two of the 
chambers consisting en- 
tirely of the privileged 
classes. There was ob- 
jection to this now, 
since, with two against 
one, it left the nation 
exactly where it had been, in the power of the privileged classes. 
They could veto anything that the third estate alone wanted ; 
they could impose anything they chose upon the third estate, voting in°the 




URGOT 
After a pasfel by Joseph Ducreux. 



In Other words, if organized as states- 

° General 



by their vote of two to one. 

hitherto, they could prevent all reform which in any way 
affected themselves, and yet such reform was an absolute necessity. 
Consulted on this problem the parlement of Paris pronounced in favor 
of the customary organization ; in other words, itself a privileged 



122 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 



body, it stood for privilege. Tlie parlement immediately became 
as unpopular as it had previously been popular, when opposing 
the monarch. 

Necker, now showing one of his chief characteristics which was to 
make him impossible as a leader in the new era, half settled the 
question and left it half 
unsettled. He, like the 
King, lacked the power 
of decision. He was a 
banker, not a statesman. 
1 1 was announced 

The third , , ... 

estate given that the third es- 
doubie mem- ^sX^ should havc as 

bership 

many members as 
the two other orders com- 
bined. Whether the three 
bodies should still meet 
and vote separately was 
not decided, but was left 
undetermined. But of 
what avail would be the 
double membership of 
the third estate — repre- 
senting more than nine- 
tenths of the population 
— unless all three met to- 
gether, unless the vote was by individuals, not by chambers ; by 
head, as the phrase ran, and not by order ? In dodging this question 
Necker was merely showing his own incapacity for strong leadership 
and was laying up abundant trouble for the immediate future. 




- Necker 
After the drawing by J. S. Duplessis. 



THE OPENING OF THE STATES-GENERAL 

The States-General met on May 5, 1789. There were about 1200 
members, of whom over 600 were members of the third estate. In 
reality, however, that class of the population had a much larger 
representation as, of the 300 representatives elected by the clergy, 
over 200 were parish priests or monks, all commoners by origin and, 
to a considerable extent, in sympathy. Each of the three orders 



GENERAL DEMAND FOR A CONSTITUTION 125 

had elected its own members. At the same time the voters, and the 
vote was nearly universal, were asked to draw up a formal statement 
of their grievances and of the reforms they favored. Fifty or sixty 
thousand of these statements or cahiers have come down to ^j^^ cahiers 
us and present a vivid and instructive criticism of the Old or statements 
Regime, and a statement of the wishes of each order. On ° grievances 
certain points there was practical unanimity on the part of clergy, 
nobles, and commoners. All ascribed the ills from which the country 
suffered to arbitrary, uncontrolled government, all talked of the 
necessity of confining the government within just limits by xhe cahiers 
establishing a constitution which should define the rights of express the 
the king and of the people, and which should henceforth be nation for a 
binding upon all. Such a constitution must guarantee in- constitution 
dividual liberty, the right to think and speak and write, — henceforth 
no lettres de cachet nor censorship. In the future the States-General 
should meet regularly at stated times, and should share the law- 
making power and alone should vote the taxes, and taxes should 
henceforth be paid by all. The clergy and nobility almost unani- 
mously agreed in their cahiers to relinquish their exemptions, for 
which they had fought so resolutely only two years before. On the 
other hand, the third estate was willing to see the continuance of 
the nobility with its rights and honors. The third estate demanded 
the suppression 'of feudal dues. There was in their cahiers no hint 
of a desire for a violent revolution. They all expressed a deep 
affection for the King, gratitude for his summoning of the States- 
General, faith that the worst was over, that now, in a union of all 
hearts, a way would easily be discovered out of the unhappy plight 
in which the nation found itself. 

An immense wave of hopefulness swept over the land. This opti- 
mism was based on the fact that the King, when consenting to call the 
States-General, had at the same time announced his accept- „,. 

^ The opti- 

ance of several important reforms, such as the periodical mism of the 
meeting of the States-General, its control of the national p^°p^® 
finances, and guarantees for the freedom of the individual. But 
the King's chief characteristic, as we have seen, was his feeble- 
ness of will, his vacillation. And from the day the deputies arrived 
in Versailles to the day of his violent overthrow this was a fatal factor 
in the history of the times. In his speech opening the States-General 
on May 5, the King said not a word about the thought that was 



124 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 




DEADLOCK IN THE STATES-GENERAL 125 

in everyone's mind, the making of a constitution. He merely 
announced that it had been called together to bring order into the 
distracted finances of the country. Necker's speech was no ^j^ .^^^ 
more promising. The government, moreover, said nothing cision of the 
about whether the estates should vote by order or by head. "'^ 

The crux of the whole matter lay there, for on the manner of organ- 
ization and procedure depended entirely the outcome. The govern- 
ment did not come forward with any program, even in details. 
It shirked its responsibility and lost its opportunity. 

ORGANIZATION OF THE STATES-GENERAL 

A needless but very serious crisis was the result. The public was 
disappointed and apprehensive. Evidently the recent liberalism 
of the King had evaporated, or he was under *a pressure which xhe conflict 
he had no strength to withstand. A conflict between the of the orders 
orders began on May 6 which lasted until the end of June and which 
ended in embittering relations which at the outset had seemed likely 
to be cordial. Should the voting be by order or by member, should 
the assembly consist of three chambers or of one? The 
difficulty arose in the need of verifying the credentials of the be three 
members. The nobles proceeded to verify as a separate ^^""^j^gp""^ 
chamber, by a vote of 188 to 47 ; the clergy did the same, but 
by a smaller majority, 133 to 114. But the third estate refused to 
verify until it should be decided that the three orders were to meet 
together in one indivisible assembly. This was a matter of ^j^^ ^^j^^ 
life or death with it, or at least of power or impotence. Both estate delays 
sides stood firm, the government allowed things to drift, angry 
passions began to develop. Until organized the States-General 
could do no business, and no organization could be effected until 
this crucial question was settled. Week after week went by and the 
dangarous deadlock continued. Verification in common would mean 
the abandonment of the class system, voting by member and not by 
order, and the consequent preponderance of the third estate, which 
considered that it had the right to preponderate as representing over 
nine-tenths of the population. Fruitless attempts to win the two 
upper orders by inviting them to join the third estate were repeatedly 
made. Finally the third estate announced that on June 1 1 it would 
begin verification and the other orders were invited for the last 



126 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

time. Then the parish priests began to come over, sympatliizing 

with the commoners rather than with the privileged class of their 

then declares own Order. Finally on June 17 the third estate took the 

Itself the momentous step of declaring itself the National Assembly, 

Assembly a distinctly revolutionary proceeding. 

ATTEMPTED SUPPRESSION QF THE STATES-GENERAL 

The King now, under pressure from the court, made a decision 
highly unwise in itself and foolishly executed. When, on June 20, 
the members of the third estate went to their usual meeting place 
they found the entrance blocked by soldiers. They were told that 



Costumes of the Three Orders 

there was to be a special royal session later and that the hall was closed' 
in order that necessary arrangements might be made for it, a pretext 
as miserable as it was vain. What did this action mean ? No one 
knew, but every one was apprehensive that it meant that the assembly 
itself, in which such earnest hopes had centered, was to be brought 
to an untimely end and the country plunged into greater misery 
than ever by the failure of the great experiment. For a moment 



THE TENNIS COURT OATH 127 

the members were dismayed and utterly distracted. Then, as by a 
common impulse, they rushed to a neighboring building in a side 
; street, which served as a tennis court. There a memorable session 
occurred, in the large, unfinished hall. Lifting their president, the 
distinguished astronomer, Bailly, to a table, the members surged 
about him, ready, it seemed, for extreme measures. There they 
. took the famous Tennis Court Oath. All the deputies present, The Tennis 
Swith one single exception, voted "never to separate, and to Court Oath 
' reassemble wherever circumstances shall require, until the constitu- 
tion of the kingdom shall be established." 

On the 23d occurred the royal session on which the privileged classes 
counted. The King pronounced the recent acts of the third estate 
; illegal and unconstitutional, and declared that the three orders ^j^^ ^.^y^, 
i should meet separately and verify their credentials. He session, 
[ rose and left the hall while outside the bugles sounded around ^""^ ^^ 
! his coach. The nobility, triumphant, withdrew from the hall ; 
, the clergy also. But in the center of the great chamber the third 
1 estate remained, in gloomy silence. This was one of the solemn, 
f critical moments of history. Suddenly the master of ceremonies 
advanced, resplendent in his official costume. "You have heard 
the King's orders," he said. "His ISIajesty requests the deputies 
of the third estate to withdraw." Behind the grand master, at the 
• door, soldiers were seen. Were they there to clear the hall ? The 
King had given his orders. To leave the hall meant abandonment 
of all that the third estate stood for ; to remain meant disobedience 
to the express commands of the King and probably severe punish- 
ment. 

The occasion brought forth its man. Mirabeau, a noble whom his 
fellow nobles had refused to elect to the States-General and who had 
then been chosen by the third estate, now arose and advanced 

, . . , , , r • Defiance of 

impetuously and imperiously toward the master of ceremonies, the King 
de Breze, and with thunderous voice exclaimed, "Go tell your ^P^^^^^^ ^^ 
master that we are here by the will of the people and that we 
shall not leave except at the point of the bayonet." Then on motion 
of Mirabeau it was voted that all persons who should lay violent 
hands on any members of the National Assembly would be "infamous 
and traitors to the nation and guilty of capital crime." De Breze 
reported the defiant eloquence to the King. All eyes were fixed upon 
the latter. Not knowing what to do Louis made a motion indicating 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 



weariness, then said: "They wish to remain, do they? Well, let 

them." 

Two days later a majority of the clergy and a minority of the 

nobility went over to the Assembly. On June 27 the King com-. 
The King manded the nobility and clergy to sit with the third estate in 
yields g^ single body. Thus the question was finally settled, which 

should have been settled before the first meeting in May. The 

National Assembly was now 

complete. It immediately 

appointed a committee on 

the constitution. The Na- 
tional Assembly, accom- 
plished by this fusion of the 

three estates, adopted the 

title Constituent Assembly 

because of the character of 

the work it had to do. 

No sooner was this crisis 

over than another began to 
The King develop. A second at- 
attempts tempt was made by the 

again to 

suppress the King, again mspired 

Assembly ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ g^p. 

press the Assembly or effec- 
tively to intimidate it, to re- 
gain the ground that had been 
lost. Considerable bodies of 
soldiers began to appear near 
Versailles and Paris. They 
were chiefly the foreign mercenaries, or the troops from frontier 
stations, supposedly less responsive to the popular emotions. On 
July II Necker and his colleagues, favorable to reform, were sud- 
denly dismissed and Necker was ordered to leave the country im- 
mediately. What could all this mean but that reaction and repres- 
sion were coming and that things were to be put back where they had 
been? The Assembly was in great danger, yet it possessed no 
physical force. What could it do if troops were sent against it ? 




MiRABEAU 

From an engraving by Fiesinger, after a draw- 
ing by J. Guerin. 



THE TENNIS COURT OATH 



129 




I30 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

POPULAR INSURRECTION: THE BASTILLE, THE TRICOLOR 

The violent intervention of the city of Paris saved the day and 
gave the protection which the nation's representatives lacked, assur- 
Paris and i^'^g their continuance. The storming of the Bastille was an 
the storm- incident which instantly seized the imagination of the world, 
Bastille, and which was disfigured and transfigured by a mass of legends 

July 14 |-]^g^(- sprang up on the very morrow of the event. The Bastille 

was a fortress commanding the eastern section of Paris. It was used 
as a state prison and had had many distinguished occupants, among 
others Voltaire and Mirabeau, thrown into it by lettres de cachet. 
It was an odious symbol of arbitrary government and it was also 
a strong fortress which these newly arriving troops might use. 
There was a large discontented and miserable class in Paris ; also a 
lively band of radical or liberal men who were in favor of reform 
and were alarmed and indignant at every rumor that the Assembly 
on which such hopes were pinned was in danger. Paris was on 
the side of the Assembly, and when the news of the dismissal of 
Necker arrived it took fire. Rumors of the most alarming character 
spread rapidly. Popular meetings were addressed by impromptu 
and impassioned orators. The people began to pillage the shops 
where arms were to be found. Finally they attacked the Bastille 
and after a confused and bloody battle of several hours the fortress 
was in their hands. They had lost about two hundred men, killed 
or wounded. The crowd savagely murdered the commander of the 
fortress and several of the Swiss Guard. Though characterized 
by these and other acts of barbarism, nevertheless the seizure of the 
Bastille was everywhere regarded in France and abroad as the 
triumph of liberty. Enthusiasm was widespread. The Fourteenth of 
July was declared the national holiday and a new flag, the tricolor, the 
red, white, and blue, was adopted in place of the old white banner of 
the Bourbons, studded with the fleur-de-lis. At the same time, quite 
spontaneously, Paris gave itself a new form of municipal government, 
superseding the old royal form, and organized a new military force, 
the National Guard, which was destined to become famous. Three 
days later Louis XVI came to the capital and formally ratified these 
changes. 

Meanwhile similar changes were made all over France. Municipal 
governments on an elective basis and national guards were created 



THE STORMING OF THE BASTHXE 




132 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

everywhere in imitation of Paris. The movement extended to rural 

France. There the peasants, impatient that the Assembly had let 

two months go by without suppressing the feudal dues, took 

outbreaks things into their own hands. They turned upon their oppres- 

against gQj-g ^^^ made a violent "war upon the chateaux," destroying- 

feudalism ' j o 

the records of feudal dues if they could find them or if the 
owners gave them up ; if not, frequently burning the chateaux them- 
selves in order to burn the odious documents. Day after day in the 
closing week of July, 1789, the destructive and incendiary process 
went on amid inevitable excesses and disorders. In this method 
feudalism was abolished — not legally but practically. It remained 
to be seen what the effect of this victory of the people would be upon 
the National Assembly. 



THE ASSEMBLY INAUGURATES A SOCIAL REVOLUTION 

Its effect was immediate and sensational. On the 4th of August, a 
committee on the state of the nation made a report, describing the 
The night incidents which were occurring throughout the length and 
session of breadth of the land, chateaux burning, unpopular tax col- 
"^"^ "* lectors assaulted, millers hanged, lawlessness triumphant. 
It was night before the stupefying report was finished. Suddenly at 
eight o'clock in the evening, as the session was about to close, a noble- 
man, the Viscount of Noailles (no-I'), rushed to the platform. The 
only reason, he said, why the people had devastated the chateaux 
was the heavy burden of the seigniorial dues, odious reminders of 
feudalism. These must be swept away. He so moved and instantly 
another noble, the Duke d'Aiguillon (a-giie-yon'), next to the king 
the greatest feudal lord in France, seconded the motion. A frenzy 
Privilege of generosity seized the Assembly. Noble vied with noble 

laid low in the enthusiasm of renunciation. The Bishop of Nancy 

renounced the privileges of his order. Parish priests renounced their 
fees. Judges discarded their distinctions. Rights of chase, rights 
of tithes, went by the board. Representatives of the cities and 
provinces gave up their privileges, Brittany, Burgundy, Lorraine 
(lo-ran'), Languedoc (lang'-we-dok). A veritable delirium of joy 
swept in wave after wave over the Assembly. All night long the 
excitement continued amid tears, embraces, rapturous applause, a 
very ecstasy of patriotic abandonment, and by eight in the morning 



THE SESSION OF AUGUST 4 



133 




134 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

thirty decrees, more or less, had been passed and the most extraor- 
A social dinary social revolution that any nation has known had been 

revolution voted. The feudal dues were dead. Tithes were abandoned ; 
the guilds, with their narrow restrictions, were swept away ; no 
longer were offices to be purchasable, but henceforth all Frenchmen 
were to be equally eligible to all public positions ; justice was to be 
free ; provinces and individuals were all to be on the same plane. 
Distinctions of class were abolished. The principle of equality was 
henceforth to be the basis of the state. 

Years later participants in this memorable session, in which a social 

revolution was accomplished or at least promised, spoke of it with 

excitement and enthusiasm. The astonishing session was 

Louis XVI 

proclaimed closcd with a Tc Dcum in the chapel of the royal palace 

*to r^f ^^ ^^^ suggestion of the Archbishop of Paris, and Louis X\T, 

French who. had had no more to do with all this than you or I, was 

^ ^'^^ officially proclaimed by the Assembly the "Restorer of 

French Liberty." 

Thus was the dead weight of an oppressive, unjust past lifted from 

the nation's shoulders. Grievances, centuries old, vanished into the 

night. That it needed time to work out all these tumultuous 

Reaction '^ 

threatened and rapturous resolutions into clear and just laws was a fact 
once more ignored by the people, who regarded them as real legislation, not 
as a program merely sketched, to be liUed in slowly in detail. 
Hence when men awoke to the fact that not everything was what it 
seemed, that before the actual application of all these changes many 
adjustments must or should be made, there was some friction, some 
disappointment, some impatience. The clouds speedily gathered 
again. Because a number of nobles and bishops had in an outburst 
of generosity relinquished all their privileges, it was not at all certain 
that their action would be ratified by even the majority of their 
orders, and it was indeed likely that the contrary would prove true. 
The contagion might not extend beyond the walls of the assembly 
hall. And many even of those who had shared the fine enthusiasm 
of that stirring session might feel differently on the morrow. This 
The counter- proved to be the case, and soon two parties appeared, sharply 
revolutionists distinguished from each other, the upholders of the revolution 
thus far accomplished and those who wished to undo it and to re- 
cover their lost advantages. The latter were called counter-revolu- 
tionaries. From this time on they were a factor, frequently highly 



THE COUNTER-REVOLUTIONISTS 135 

significant, in the history of modern France. Although after the 
Fourteenth of July the more stiff-necked and angry of the courtiers, 
led by the Count of Artois (ar-twa'), brother of the King, had left 
the country and had begun that "emigration" which was to do 
much to embroil France with Europe, yet many courtiers still „ 
remained and, with the powerful aid of Marie Antoinette, intrigues of 
played upon the feeble monarch. The Queen, victim of *^ *^°"'* 
slanders and insults, was temperamentally and intellectually inca- 
pable of understanding or sympathizing with the reform movement. 
She stiffened under the attacks, her pride was fired, and she did what 
she could to turn back the tide, with results highly disastrous to 
herself and to the monarchy. Another feature of the situation was 
the subterranean intriguing, none the less real because difficult 
accurately to describe, of certain individuals who thought they 
had much to gain by troubling the waters, such as the Duke of 
Orleans, cousin of the King, immensely wealthy and equally unscru- 
pulous, who nourished the scurvj' ambition of overthrowing Louis 
XVI and of putting the House of Orleans in place of the House of 
Bourbon. All through the Revolution we find such elements of 
personal ambition or malevolence, anxious to profit by fomenting 
the general unrest. At every stage in this strange, eventful history 
we observe the mixture of the mean with the generous, the insincere 
with the candid, the hypocritical and the oblique with the honest and 
the patriotic. It was a web woven of mingled yarn. 

Such were some of the possible seeds of future trouble. In addi- 
tion, increasing the general sense of anxiety and insecurity, was the 
fact that two months went by and yet the King did not ratify or 
accept the decrees of August 4, which, without his acceptance, atdtude"^ ^ 
lacked legal force. Certain articles of the constitution had inspires 
been already drafted, and these, too, had not yet received the 
royal sanction. Was the King plotting something, or were the 
plotters about him getting control of him once more? The people 
lived in an atmosphere of suspicion ; also thousands and thousands of 
them were on the point of starvation, and the terror of famine 
reenforced the terror of suspicion. 

Out of this wretched condition of discontent and alarm was 

and 

born another of the famous incidents of the Revolution. Early popular 
in October rumors reached Paris that at a banquet offered ^"^p'"*"* 
at Versailles to some of the crack regiments which had been sum- 



136 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 



moned there the tricolor had been stamped upon, that threats had 
been made against the Assembly, and that the Queen, by her pres- 
ence, had sanctioned these outrages. 

On October 5 several thousand women of the people, set in motion 

in some obscure way, started to march to Versailles, drawing cannon 

The march with them. It was said they were going to demand the reduc- 

women to ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ price of bread and at the same time to see that 

VersaiUes those who had insulted the national flag should be punished. 

They were followed by thousands of men, out of work, and by many 

doubtful characters. Lafayette, hastily gathering some of the 




The March of the Women to Versailles, October 5, 1789 
After an anonvmous water-color. 



The royal 
family 
forced to 
leave 
Versailles 



Guards, started after them. That evening the motley and sinister 
crowd reached Versailles and bivouacked in the streets and in the 
vast court of the royal palace. All night long obscure preparations 
as for a battle went on. On the morning of the 6th the crowd forced 
the gates, killed several of the guards, and invaded the palace, even 
reaching the entrance to the Queen's apartments. The Queen 
fled to th.e apartments of the King for safety. The King finally 
appeared on a balcony, surrounded by members of his family, 
addressed the crowd, and promised them food. The outcome 
of this extraordinary and humiliating day was that the King 
was persuaded to leave the proud palace of Versailles and go 
to Paris to live in the midst of his so-called subjects. At two o'clock 



138 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION 

the grim procession began. The entire royal family, eight per- 
sons, packed into a single carriage, started for Paris, drawn at a 
walk, surrounded by the women, and by bandits who carried on 
pikes the heads of the guards who had been killed at the entrance to 
the palace. "We are bringing back the baker, and the baker's wife, 
and the baker's son !" shouted the women. At eleven o'clock that 
night Louis XVI was in the Tuileries (twe'le-riz). 

Ten days later the Assembly followed. The King, and the As- 
sembly were now under the daily supervision of the people of Paris. 
In reality they were prisoners. Versailles was definitely 
menf ''"'^ abandoned. From this moment dates the great influence of 
removed to ^}^g Capital. A single city was henceforth always in a position 
to dominate the Assembly. The people could easily bring 
their pressure to bear for they were admitted to the thousand or more 
seats in the gallery of the Assembly's hall of meeting and they con- 
sidered that they had the freedom of the place, hissing unpopular 
speakers, vociferating their wishes. Those who could not get in 
congregated outside, arguing violently the measures that were being 
discussed within. Now and then someone would announce to them 
from the windows how matters were proceeding in the hall. Shouts 
of approval or disapproval thus reached the members from the 
vehement audience outside. 



REFERENCES 

Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette : Lowell, The Eve of the French Rev- 
olution , pp. 11-24. 

Turcot : Say, Turgol, Chaps. V-VIII ; Morley, Miscellanies, Vol. n, pp. 
41-57, 111-162; Lowell, pp. 235-238; Robinson, Readings in European 
History, Vol. II, pp. 386-391. 

Attempts at Reform: Mathews, The French Revolution, pp. 91-110. 

Summoning OF THE States-General : Mathews, pp. 11 i-i 18; Stephens, 
History of the French Revolution, Vol. I, Chap. I; Bourne, The Revolu- 
tionary Period in Europe, pp. 88-92 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, 
pp. 96-118. 

The Cahiers : Lowell, Chap. XXI; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, 
pp. 159-169; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. 
I, pp. 248-251 ; University of Pennsylvania, Translations and Reprints, Vol. IV, 
pp. 24-36. 

Meeting of the St.ates-General : Mathews, pp. 111-124; Stephens, Vol. 



REFERENCES 139 

Ij PP- 55^67; MacLehose, From the Monarchy to the Republic, Chaps. IV-VI; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 145-158 ; Anderson, Co>istitutions and 
Documents, Nos. i and 2. 

The Fall of the Bastille : Mathews, pp. 125-137; Stephens, Vol. I, pp. 
128-145; MacLehose, Chap. VIII; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 
159-169. 

The Fourth OF August : Mathews, pp. 138-144; Anderson, No. 4; Acton, 
Lectures on the French Revolution, pp. 94-102 ; Bourne, pp. 100-103. 

The Fifth and Sixth of October : Mathews, pp. 144-149 ; Stephens, Vol. 
I, pp. 219-228; MacLehose, Chaps. XI and XII; Bourne, pp. 104-106. 



CHAPTER VI 



THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 



THE DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN 



Lafayette 
proposes the 
Declaration 



The States-General which met in Ma}^ 1789, had in June adopted 
the name National Assembly. This body is also known as the Con- 
stituent Assembly, as its chief work was the making of a constitution. 
It had begun work upon the constitution while still in Versailles 
and the first fruit of 
its labors was the 
Declaration of the 
Rights of Man, a 
statement of the 
rights which belong 
to men because they 
are human beings, 
which are not the 
gift of any govern- 
ment. The Declara- 
tion was drawn 
up in imita- 
tion of Ameri- 
can usage. Lafa- 
yette, a hero of the 
American Revolu- 
tion, and now a 
prominent figure in 
the French, brought 
forward a draft of a declaration just before the storming of the Bas- 
tille (bas-tel')- He urged two chief reasons for its adoption ; first it 
would present the people with a clear conception of the elements of 
liberty, which, once understanding, they would insist upon possess- 
ing ; and, secondly, it would be an invaluable guide for the Assembly 

140 




Lafayette 
From an engraving by Lavachez, after Duplessis-Bertaux. 



DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN 141 

in its work of elaborating the constitution. All propositions could 
be tested by comparison with its carefully defined principles. 
It would be a guarantee against mistakes or errors by the As- concerning 
sembly itself. Another orator paid a tribute to America, ex- the Deciara- 
plaining why "the noble idea of this declaration, conceived in 
another hemisphere, ' ' ought to be transplanted to France. Opponents 
of the proposal declared it useless and harmful because bound to 
distract the members from important labors, as tending to waste 
time on doubtful generalizations, as leading to hair-splitting and 
endless debate, when the Assembly's attention ought to be focused 
on the pressing problems of legislation and administration. The 
Assembly took the side of Lafayette and, after intermittent discus- 
sion, composed the notable document in August, 1789. As a result 
of the events of October 5, described above, the King accepted it. 
The Declaration, which has been called "the most remarkable 

The Decla- 

fact in the history of the growth of democratic and republican ration a 
ideas" in France, as "the gospel of modern times," was not composite 

. . product 

the work of any single mind, nor of any committee or group 
of leaders. Its collaborators were very numerous. The political 
discussions of the eighteenth century furnished many of the ideas 
and even some of the phrases. English and American example 
counted for much. The necessities of the national situation were 
factors of importance. 

The Declaration of the Rights of iMan laid down the principles of 
modern governments. The men who drew up that document 
believed these principles to be universally, true and every- j^ ortance 
where applicable. The^" did not establish rights — they of the 
merely declared them. Frenchmen well knew that they were 
composing a purely dogmatic text, but they felt that they were 
inaugurating a new phase in the history of humanity, that, by 
solemnly formulating the creed of the future, they were rendering 
an inestimable service, not to France alone but to the world. Though 
America had set the example, it was felt that France could "perfect" 
it for the other hemisphere. 

The seventeen articles of this creed asserted that men are free and 
equal, that the people are sovereign, that law is an expression of the 
popular will, and that in the making of it the people may par- ^^ 

^, ^ '^ '^ ^ '^ Its contents 

ticipate, either directly, or indirectly through their repre- 
sentatives, and that all officials possess only that authority which has 



142 TllIC MAKINC; ()!■ rillC CONS'I TirTION 

been (IrliiulcK' \i,\\r\\ lluiii by law. i\\\ those 'liberties of the person, 
ol free speech, iwc assembly, justice administered by one's peers, 
which had been worked out in England and America were asserted. 
Tlu'se piiiiciples were the opposite of those of the Old Regime. If 
incorporated in laws and institutions, they meant the permanent 
abolition of that system. 

As a mailer of fact the expectation thai ihe Declaration would con- 
stitute a new evangel for the world has nol proved so great an exag- 
widespread geratioii as the optimism of its authors and the pessimism of 
ihe'Dec^ " its critics would promi)t one to think. When men wish any- 
larntion where to recall the rights of man it is this P'rench document that 

they ha\'e in mind. The Declaration long ago passed beyond the 
frontiers of !•" ranee. It has been studied, copied, or denounced 
nearly everywhere. It has been an indisputable factor in the 
political and social evolution of modi-rn i"",urope. During the past 
century, whenever a nation has aspired to liberty, it has sought its 
principles in this French Declaration. 

The Declaration was, of course, only an ideal, a goal toward which 
society should aim, not a fuHillment. It was a list of princijoles, not 
the realisation of those |)rincii)les. It was a declaration of rights, 
not a guarantee of rights. The problem of how to guarantee what 
was so succinctly declared has filled more ihaii a t-entury of French 
history. We shall now see how far the Assembly which drafted this 
Declaration was willing or able to go in applying its principles in the 
constitution, of which il was the i)reamble. 

TIIK Ni:W CONSTITUTION .\('(T,l'Ti:i) I5V nif: KING 

'I'he (-onstitution was only slowly I'laborated. .Some of its more 
fundamental articles were adopted in 1781). But numerous laws were 
How the passed in \yqo and 1791, which were really parts of the con- 

constitution stitution. Tluis it grew piece by i)iece. Finally all this 
was ma e legislation was revised, retouched, and codified into a single 
document, which was accepted by the King in i7()i. Though some- 
times called the Constitution of 1789, it is more generally and more 
correctly known as the Constitution of 1 7<)i . Tt was the first written 
constitution France had ever had. iManuMl under very different 
c-onditions from those under which the constitution of the United 
States had been franred only a short time before, it resembled the 



PRINCIPLES OF THP: CONSTITUTION 143 

work of the Philadelphia Convention in that it was conspicuously the 
product of the spirit of compromise. 

With the exception of the vigorous assertions of the Declaration 
of the Rights of Man, which was prefixed to it, the document was 
marked by as great a moderation as was consistent with the com- 
prehensive changes that were demanded by public opinion. It is 
permeated through and through with two principles, the ^^^ funda- 
sovereignty of the people, all governmental powers issuing mental 
from their consent and will, and the separation of the powers p'"^*^''' ^^ 
sharply from each other, of the executive, the legislative, and the 
judicial branches, a division greatly emphasized by Montesquieu 
as the sole method of insuring liberty. 

The form of government was to be monarchical. This was in 

conformity with the wishes of the people as expressed in the cahiers, 

and with the feelings of the Constituent Assembly. But "_ 

whereas formerly the king had been an absolute, henceforth he a constitu- 

was to be a limited, a constitutional ruler. Indicative of the ^^^^^^ mon- 
archy 
profound difference between these two conceptions, his former 

title. King of France and of Navarre, now gave way to that of King 

of the French. Whereas formerly he had taken what he chose out of 

the national treasury for his personal use, now he was to receive a 

salary or civil list of the definite amount — and no more — of 

25,000,000 francs. He was to appoint the ministers or heads of 

the cabinet departments, but he was forbidden to select mem- The powers 

bers of the legislature for such positions. The English system °^ t^« ''•^s 

of parliamentary government was deliberat'ely avoided because it 

was believed to be vicious in that ministers could bribe or influence 

the members of Parliament to do their will, which might not at all 

be the will of the people. Ministers were not even to be permitted 

to come before the legislature to defend or explain their policies. 

A departure from the priijciple of the separation of powers, in 

general so closely followed, was shown in the granting of the veto 

power to the king. The king, who had hitherto made the laws, xhe question 

was now deprived of the law-making power, but he could pre- °^ ^^^ ^^*° 

vent the immediate enforcement of an act passed by the legislature. 

There was much discussion over this subject in the Assembly. Some 

were opposed to any kind of veto ; others wanted one that should 

be absolute and final. The, Assembly compromised and granted 

the king a suspensive veto, that is, he might prevent the application 



144 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 

of a law voted by two successive legislatures, namely, for a possible 
period of four years. If the third legislature should indicate its 
approval of the law in question, then it was to be put into operation 
whether the king assented or not. 

The king was to retain the conduct of foreign affairs. He was 
to appoint and receive ambassadors, was to be the head of the navy 
and army, and was to appoint to higher offices. The Assembly at 
first thought of leaving him the right to make peace and war, then, 
fearing that he might drag the nation into a war for personal or 
'dynastic and not national purposes, it decided that he might propose 
peace or war, but that the legislature should decide upon it. 

The legislative power was given by the Constitution of 179 1 to a 

single assembly of 745 members, to be elected for a term of two years. 

Several of the deputies desired a legislature of two chambers, 

tution and cited the example of England and America. But the 

creates a second chamber in England was the House of Lords, and 

legislature " 

the French, who had abolished the nobility, had no desire 
to establish an hereditary chamber. Moreover the English system 
was based on the principle of inequality. The French were founding 
their new system upon the principle of equality. Even among the 
nobles themselves there was opposition to a second chamber — the 
provincial nobility fearing that only the court nobles would be mem- 
bers of it. On the other hand, the Senate of the United States was a 
The legis- concession to the states-rights feeling, a feeling which the 
co^nsi^ts French wished to destroy by abolishing the provinces and the 

single local provincial patriotism, by thoroughly unifying France, 

chamber Thus the plan of dividing the legislature into two chambers 

was deliberately rejected, for what seemed good and sufficient 
reasons. 

ELECTORAL SYSTEM 

How was this legislature to be chosen? Here we find a decided 

departure from the spirit and the letter of the Declaration, which had 

Citizens asserted that all men are equal in rights. Did not this mean 

active and universal suffrage ? Such at least was not the opinion of the 

passive Constituent Assembly, which now made a distinction between 

citizens, declaring some active, some passive. To be considered 

an active citizen one must be at least twenty-five years of age and must 

pay annually in direct taxes the equivalent of three days' wages. 



FRANCE BY DEPARTMENTS 



145 




%• 



146 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 

This excluded the poor from this class, and the number was large. 
It has been estimated that there were somewhat over 4,000,000 active 
citizens and about 3,000,000 passive. 

The active citizens alone .had the right to vote. But even the}' did 
not vote directly for the members of the legislature. They chose 
electors at the ratio of one for every 100 active citizens. These 
electors must meet a much higher property qualification, the 
lature elected equivalent of f romi 1 50 to 200 days' wages in direct taxes. As 
indirectly ^ matter of fact this resulted in rendering eligible as electors 
only about 43,000 individuals. These electors chose the members 
of the legislature, the deputies. They also chose the judges under 
the new system. Thus the Constituent Assembly, so zealous in 
abolishing old privileges, was, in defiance of its own principles, 
establishing new ones. Political rights in the new state were made 
the monopoly of those who possessed a certain amount of property. 
There was no property qualification required for deputies. Any 
active citizen was eligible, but as the deputies were elected by the 
propertied men, the latter would in all probability choose only 
propertied men — the electors would choose from their own class. 

The judicial power was completely revolutionized. Hitherto 
judges had bought their positions, which carried with them titles and 
privileges and which they might pass on to their sons. Henceforth 
An elective "^ judgcs, of whatever rank in the hierarchj', were to be elected 
judiciary j^y ^^g electors described above. Their terms were to range 

from two to four years. The jury, something hitherto unknown, 
to France, was now introduced for criminal cases. Hitherto the 
judge had decided all cases. 

For purpose of administration and local government a new system 

was established. The old thirty- two provinces were abolished and 

France was divided into eighty-three departments of nearly 

divided into uniform sizc. The departments were divided into arron- 

departmen s dissenients, these into cantons, and these into municipalities or 

communes. These are terms which have ever since been in vogue. 

France, from being a highly centralized state, became one highly 

decentralized. Whereas formerly the central government had been 

France de- represented in each province by its own agents or office-holders, 

centralized ^-^g intendants and their subordinates, in the departments 

of the future the central government was to have no representatives. 

The electors, described above, were to choose the local departmental 



\^ ^/ 

THE CONSTITUTION OF 1791 147 

officials. It would be the business of these officials to carry out the 
decrees of the central government. But what if they should disobey ? 
The central government would have no control over them, as it would 
not appoint them and could neither remove nor discipline them. 

DEFECTS OF THE CONSTITUTION 

The Constitution of 1791 represented an improvement in French 
government ; yet it did not work well and did not last long. As a 
first experiment in the art of self-government it had its value, -or . ^f 
but it revealed inexperience and poor judgment in several the central 
points which prepared trouble for the future. The executive eovemmen 
and the legislature were so sharply separated that communication 
between them was difficult and suspicion was consequently easily 
fostered. The king might not select his ministers from the legisla- 
ture, he might not, in case of a difference of opinion with the legis- 
lature, dissolve the latter, as the English king could do, thus allowing 
the voters to decide between them. The king's veto was not a 
weapon strong enough to protect him from the attacks of the legis- 
lature, yet it was enough to irritate the legislature, if used. The 
distinction between active and passive citizens was in plain and 
flagrant defiance of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and 
inevitably created a discontented class. The administrative de- 
centralization was so complete that the efficiency of the national gov- 
ernment was destroyed. France was split up into eighty-three frag- 
ments ; and the coordination of all these units, their direction toward 
great national ends in response to the will of the nation as a whole, 
was rendered extremely difficult, and in certain crises impossible. 

The work of reform carried out by the Constituent Assembly was on 
an enormous scale, immensely more extensive than that of our Federal 
Convention. We search history in vain for any companion „. 
piece. It is unique. Its destructive work proved durable Constituent 
and most important. Much of its constructive work, how- ^^^"^ ^ 
ever, proved very fragile. Mirabeau expressed his opinion in saying 
that " the disorganization of the kingdom could not be better worked 
out." 

CHURCH LANDS SEIZED AND SOLD 

There were other dangerous features of the situation which inspired 
alarm and seemed to keep open and to embitter the relations of 



148 



THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 



various classes and to foster opportunities for the discontented and 
the ambitious. The legislation concerning the Church proved 
highly divisive in its effects, ilt began with the confiscation of its 
property ; it was continued in the attempt profoundly to alter its 
organization. 

The States-General had been summoned to provide for the finances 

of the country. As this problem grew daily more pressing, as various 

attempts to meet it proved futile, as bankruptcy was imminent, the 

Assembly finally decided to sell for the state the vast properties of 

the Church. The argument was that the Church was not the 

declared ^° ^ owner but was merely the administrator, enjoying only the 

national ^gg Qf ^j-^g yast wealth which had been bestowed upon it by 

the faithful, but bestowed for public/'^ational purposes, 

namely, the maintenance of houses of worship, schools, hospitals ; 

and that if the state 
would otherwise pro- 
vide for the carrying 
out of the intentions 



property 



fa 



Serie Gof) 



k>triauie4----tiatt(>riaAMXJ . 



de^tiiKpiante--s<dyS, 



of these numerous 
benefactors, it might 
apply the property, 
which was the prop- 
erty of the nation, 
not of the Church 
as a corporation, to 
whatever uses it 
might see fit. Acting 
on this theory a de- 
cree ^was passed by 
the Assemblj^ de- 
claring these lands 
national. They con- 
stituted perhaps a fourth or a fifth of the territory of France and 
represented immense wealth, amply sufficient, it was believed, to 
set the public finances right. 

But such property could only be used if converted into money, and 
that would be a slow process, running through years. The expedient 
was devised of issuing paper money, as the government needed it, 
against this property as security. This paper money bore the name 




An Assignat 
Redrawn from a photograph. 



REORGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH 149 

of assigfiats. Persons receiving such assignats could not demand gold 
for them, as in the case of most of our paper mone}^ but could use 
them in buying the national domains. There was value, there- „, 

-' '=' ' The assig- 

fore, behind these paper emissions. The danger in the use of nats or paper 
paper money, however, always is the inclination, so easy to ™°"^y 
jield to, to issue far more paper than the value of the property 
behind it. This proved a temptation which the revolutionary 
assemblies did not have strength of mind or will to resist. At first 
the assignats were issued in limited quantities as the state needed 
the money, and the public willingly accepted them. But later 
larger and larger emissions were made, far out of proportion to the 
value of the national domains. This meant the rapid depre- 
ciation of the paper. People would not accept it at its face depreciation 
value, as they had -at first been willing to do. The value of "f the 

1 ^1 1 ... assignats 

the Church property was estimated m 1789 as 4,000,000,000 
francs. Between 1789 and 1796 over 45,000,000,000 of assignats 
were issued. In 1789 an assignat of 100 francs was accepted for 
100 francs in coin. But by 1791 it had sunk from par to 82, and by 
1796 to less than a franc. This was neither an honest nor an effective . 
solution of the perplexing financial problem. It was evasion, it 
was in its essence repudiation. The Constituent Assembly did 
nothing toward solving the problem that had occasioned its meeting. 
It left the national finances in a worse welter than it had found 
them in. 

THE CHURCH AND THE STATE 

Another piece of legislation concerning the Church, much rflore 
serious in its effects upon the cause of reform, was the Civil Constitu- 
tion of the Clergy. By act of the Assembly the number of ^, „. . 
dioceses was reduced from 134 to 83, one for each department. Constitution 
The bishops and priests were henceforth to be elected by the ° *^^ Clergy 
same persons who elected the departmental officials. Once elected, 
the bishops were to announce the fact to the Pope, who was not to 
have the right to approve or disapprove but merely to confirm. He 
was, then, to recognize them. If he refused, the ordinary courts 
could be invoked. The clergy were to receive salaries from the 
state, were, in other words to become state officials. The income of 
most of the bishops would be greatly reduced ; that of the parish 
priests, on the other hand, would be considerably increased. 



150 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 

This law was not acceptable to sincere Catholics, since it altered by 

act of politicians an organization that had hitherto been controlled 

o osition absolutely from within. Bishops and priests were to be elected 

to this like other officials — that is, Protestants, Jews, free thinkers, 

constitution ^-light participate in choosing the religious functionaries of 

the Catholic Church. Judges, who might, perhaps, be infidels, 

might yet play a decisive part. The Pope was practically ignored. 

His nominal headship was not questioned. His real power was 

largely destroyed. He would be informed of what was happening ; 

his approval would not be necessary. 

The Assembly voted that all clergymen must take an oath to 
support this Civil Constitution of the Clergy. Only four of the 134 
Religious bishops Consented to do so. Perhaps a third of the parish 
discord priests consented. Those who consented were called the 

juring, those who refused, the non-juring or refractory clergy. In 
due time elections were held as provided by the law and those elected 
were called the constitutional clergy. France witnessed the spectacle 
of two bodies of priests, one non-juring, chosen in the old way, the 
other elected by the voters indirectly. The scandal was great and 
the danger appalling, for religious discord was introduced into every 
city and hamlet. Faith supported the one body, the state supported 
the other — and the state embarked upon a long, gloomy, and 
unsuccessful struggle to impose its will in a sphere where it did not 
belong. 

Most fatal were the consequences. One was that it made the posi- 
tion of Louis XVI, a sincere Catholic, far more difficult and exposed 
him to the charge of being an enemy of the Revolution, if he hesitated 
in his support of measures which he could not and did not approve. 
Another was that it provoked in various sections, notably in Vendee 
(voh-de'), the most passionate civil war France had ever 
clergy oppose known. Multitudes of the lower clergy, who had favored 
the Revoiu- ^j^jj greatly helped the Revolution so far, now turned against 
it for conscience' sake. We cannot trace in detail this lamen- 
table chapter of history. Suffice it to say that the Constituent 
Assembly made no greater or more pernicious mistake. The Church 
had, as the issue proved, immense spiritual influence over the peas- 
ants, the vast bulk of the population. Henceforth there was a 
divided allegiance — allegiance to the State, allegiance to the Church. 
Men had to make an agonizing choice. The smaller counter-revo- 



THE FLIGHT TO VARENNES 151 

lutionary party of the nobles, hitherto a staff without an army, was 
now reenforced by thousands and miUions of recruits, prepared to 
face any sacrifices. 

"I would rather be King of Metz than remain King of France in 
such a position," said Louis XVI, as he signed the decree requiring 
an oath to the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, "but this will shau the 
end soon." The meaning of which remark was that the King ^"^s flee? 
was now through with his scruples, that he was resolved to call the 
monarchs of Europe to his aid, that he was determined to escape 
from this coil of untoward events which was binding him tighter and 
tighter, threatening soon to strangle him completely. The idea of a 
royal flight was not new. ]\Iarie Antoinette had thought of it long 
before. Mirabeau had counseled it under certain conditions which, 
-however, were no longer possible. The nobles who had fled from 
France, some of them after the fall of the Bastille, more of them 
after the war upon the chateaux, hung upon the fringes of the king- 
dom, in Belgium, in Piedmont, and particularly in the petty German 
states that lined the fabled banks of the river Rhine, eager to have the 
King come to them, eager to embroil Europe with France, that thus 
they might return to Paris with the armies that would surely be easily 
victorious, and set back the clock to where it stood in 1789, inciden- 
tally celebrating that happy occurrence by miscellaneous punishment 
of all the notable revolutionists, so that henceforth imaginative 
spirits would hesitate before again laying impious hands upon the 
Lord's anointed, upon kings by divine right, upon nobles reposing 
upon rights no less sacred, upon the holy clergy. The Count of 
Artois, the proud and empty-headed brother of the King, one of the 
first to emigrate, had said, "We shall return within three months." 
As a matter of fact he was to return only after twenty-three years, a 
considerable miscalculation. 

ATTEMPTED ESCAPE OF THE KING AND QUEEN 

Louis XVI, wounded in his conscience, planned to escape from 
Paris, to go to the eastern part of France, where there were French 
troops on which he thought he could rely. Then, surrounded by 
faithful adherents, he could reassume the kingly role and come back 
to Paris, master of the situation. 

Disguised as a valet the King, accompanied by the Queen, dis- 



15^ 



THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 



guised as a Russian lady, escaped from the Tuileries in the night of 

June 20, 1 79 1, in a clumsy coach. All the next day they rolled over 

The flight the white highways of Champagne (sham-pan') under a terrible 

to Varennes gQn, reaching at about midnight the little village of Varennes 

(va-ren') not far from the frontier. There they were recognized 

and arrested. The National Assembly sent three commissioners to 

The return bring them back. The return was for these two descendants 

to Paris of long lines of kings a veritable ascent of Calvary. Outrages, 

insults, jokes, ignominies of every kind, were hurled at them by the 




The Tuileries 
After an engraving by J. Rigaud. 

crowds that thronged about them in the villages through which they 
passed — a journey without rest, uninterrupted, under the annihilat- 
ing heat, the suffocating dust of June. Reaching Paris they were 
no longer overwhelmed with insults, but were received in glacial 
silence by enormous throngs who stood with hats on, as the royal 
coach passed by. The King was impassive, but "our poor Queen," 
so wrote a friend, "bowed her head almost to her knees." Rows of 
National Guards stood, arms grounded, as at funerals. At seven 
o'clock that night they were in the Tuileries once more. Marie 
Antoinette had in these few days of horror grown twenty years older. 
Her hair had turned quite white, "like the hair of a woman of 
seventy." 

The consequences of this woeful misadventure were extremely 
grave. Louis XVI had shown his real feelings. The fidelity of his 



154 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION 

people to him was not entirely destroyed but was badly shaken. Thej^ 
no longer believed in the sincerity of his utterances, his oaths to sup- 
port the Constitution. The Queen was visited with contumely, 

Effect of '^ . 

the King's being regarded as the arch-conspirator. The throne was 

^^^^^ undermined. A republican party appeared. Before this no 

one had considered a republic possible in so large a country as France. 

Republics were for small states like those of ancient Greece or 

medieval Italy. Even the most violent revolutionists, Robespierre, 

Dan ton, Marat, were, up to this time, monarchists. Now, however, 

France had a little object lesson. During the absence of the King, 

the government of the Assembly continued to work normally. In 

p the period following, during which Louis XVI was suspended 

republican from the excrcisc of his powers, government went on without 

^"^^ damage to the state. A king was evidently not indispensable. 

It has been correctly stated that the flight to Varennes created the 

republican party in France, a party that has had an eventful history 

since then, and has finally, after many vicissitudes, established its 

regime. 

But this republican party was very small. The very idea of a 
republic frightened the Constituent Assembly, everi after the revela- 
tion of the faithlessness of the King. Consequently, in a revulsion of 
feeling, the Assembly, after a little, restored Louis XVI to his posi- 
tion, finished the Constitution, accepted his oath to support it, and on 
September 30, 1791, this memorable body declared its mission fulfilled 
and its career at an end. 

The National Assembly before adjournment committed a final 
and unnecessary mistake. In a mood of fatal disinterestedness 
A fatal it voted that none of its members should be eligible to 

ordinance ^^e next legislature or to the ministry. Thus the experience 
of the past two years was thrown away and the new constitu- 
tion was intrusted to hands entirely different from those that had 
fashioned it. 

REFERENCES 

The Declaration of the Rights of Man : Acton, Lectures on the French 
Revolution, pp. 102-108; Aulard, The French Revolution, Vol. I, pp. 145-160; 
Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 259- 
262 ; Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, pp. 58-60. 

The Making of the Constitution : Mathews, The French Revolution, 



REFERENCES 155 

pp. 150-165; Bourne, The Rcvohilionary Period in Eiirjope, Chap. VIII; 
Anderson, No. 15. 

The Finances and the Civil Constitution of the Clergy : Bourne, 
Chap. IX; Acton, pp. 164-173; Stephens, History of the French Revolution, 
Vol. I, Chap.'X; Robinson and Beard, Vol. I, pp. 273-277. 

The Flight to Varennes : Bourne, pp. 143-146; Mathews, pp. 176-179; 
Acton, pp. 174-192; Stephens, Vol. I, pp. 434-461. 



CHAPTER VII 

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

The Constitution was now to be put into force. France was to 

make the experiment of a constitutional monarchy in place of the old 

absolute monarchy, gone forever. In accordance with the pro- 

lative A^s-^ visions of the document a legislature was now chosen. Its 

sembiy f^j-g^- session was held October i, 1791. Elected for a two- 

(October i, i i ■ i t- i 

1791-Sep- year term, it served for less than a smgle year. Expected 
1702^' ^°' ^° inaugurate an era of prosperity and happiness by applying 
the new principles of government in a time of peace, to con- 
solidate the monarchy on its new basis, it was destined to a stormy 
life and to witness the fall of the monarchy in irreparable ruin. A 
few days before it met Paris, adept, as always, in the art of observing 
fittingly great national occasions, had celebrated "the end of the 
Revolution." The Old Regime was buried. The. new one was now 
to be installed. 

But the Revolution had not ended. Instead, it shortly entered 
upon a far more critical state. The reasons for this unhappy turn 
were grave and numerous. They were inherent in the situation, 
both in France and in Europe. Would the King frankly accept his 
new position, with no mental reservations, with no secret determina- 
tions, honestly, entirely? If so, and if he would by his conduct 
convince his people of his loyalty to his word, of his intention to rule 
as a constitutional monarch, to abide by the reforms thus far ac- 
complished, with no thought of upsetting the new system, then 
The Legis- there was an excellent chance that the future would be one of 
lative As- peaceful development, for France was thoroughly monarchical 

sembiy favor- : . ^ .. . . . . ° , -. . , . 

able to the m tradition, in feeling, and m conviction. The Legislative 
monarchy Assembly was as monarchical in its sentiments as the Con- 
stituent had been. But if the King's conduct should arouse the sus- 
picion that he was intriguing to restore the Old Regime, that his 

156 



RELIGIOUS DISSENSION 157 

oaths were insincere, then the people would turn against him and 
the experiment of a constitutional monarchy would be hazarded. 
France had no desire to be a republic, but it had a fixed and resolute 
aversion to the Old Regime. 

GROWING DISTRUST OF LOUIS XVI 

Inevitably, since the flight to Varennes, suspicion of Louis XVI was 
widespread. The suspicion was not dissipated by wise conduct on his 
part, but was increased in the following months to such a pitch that 
the revolutionary fever had no chance to subside, but necessarily 
mounted steadily. The King's views were inevitably colored by his 
hereditary pretensions. Moreover, as we have seen, the religious 
question had been injected into the Revolution in so acute a form that 
his conscience as a Catholic was outraged. It was this that strained 
to the breaking point the relations of the Legislative Assembly 
and Louis XVI. The Civil Constitution of the Clergy gave rise to 
a bitter and distressing civil war. In Vendee several thousand 
peasants, led by the refractory or non-juring priests, rose against 
the elected, constitutional priests and drove them out of the pulpits 
and churches. When the National Guards were sent among them to 
enforce the law they flew to arms against them, and civil war began. 

The Assembly forthwith passed a decree against the refractory 
priests, which only made a bad matter worse. They were required to 
take the oath to the Civil Constitution within a week. If 

DccrGG 

they refused they would be considered "suspicious" char- against the 
acters, their pensions would be suppressed, and they would non-juring 
be subject to the watchful and hostile surveillance of the 
government. Louis XVI vetoed this decree, legitimately using the 
power given him by the Constitution. This veto, accompanied by 
others, offended public opinion, and weakened the King's hold upon 
France. It would have been better for Louis had he never been 
given the veto power, since every exercise of it placed him in opposi- 
tion to the Assembly and inflamed party passions. 

The other decrees which he vetoed concerned the royal princes and 
the nobles who had emigrated from France, either because j^^^^j^ j^^j 
they no longer felt safe there, or because they thought that by and the 
going to foreign countries they might induce their rulers to *™*sres 
intervene in French affairs and restore the Old Regime. This was 



158 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

wanton playing with fire. For the effect on France might be the 
very opposite of that intended. It might so heighten and exasperate 
popular feeling that the monarchy would be in greater danger than 
if let alone. This emigration, mostly of the privileged classes, had 
begun on the morrow of the storming of the Bastille. The Count 
d'Artois, younger brother of Louis XVI, had left France on July 15, 
1789. The emigration became important in 1790, after the decree 
abolishing all titles of nobility, a decree that deeply wounded the 
pride of the nobles, and it was accelerated in 1791, after the flight to 
Varennes and the suspension of the King. It was later augmented 
by great numbers of non-juring priests and of bourgeois, who put 
their fidelity to the Catholic Church above their patriotism. 

It has been estimated that during the Revolution a hundred and 
fifty thousand people left France in this way. Many of them went 
to the little German states on the eastern frontier. There they 
formed an army of perhaps 20,000 men. The Count of Provence, 
brother of Louis XVI, was the titular leader and claimed that he 
was the Regent of France on the ground that Louis XVI was virtually 
„ bi ^ prisoner. The emigres ceaselessly intrigued in the German 

intrigues of and Other European courts, trying to instigate their rulers to 
t e emigres j^vade France, particularly the rulers of Austria and Prussia, 
important military states, urging that the fate of one monarch 
was a matter that concerned all monarchs, for sentimental reasons 
and for practical, since, if the impious revolution triumphed in 
France, there would come the turn of the other kings for similar 
treatment at the hands of rebellious subjects. In 1791 the emigres 
succeeded in inducing the rulers of Austria and Prussia to issue 
the Declaration of Pillnitz announcing that the cause of Louis XVI 
was the cause of all the monarchs of Europe. This Declaration 
was made conditional upon the cooperation of all the countries and, 
therefore, it was largely bluster and had no direct importance. It 
was not sufficient to bring on war. But it angered France and in- 
creased suspicion of the King. The Legislative Assembly passed 
Decrees ^^^ decrees, one declaring that the Count of Provence would 

against the be deprived of his eventual rights to the throne if he did not 
emigres return to France within two months, the other declaring that 

the property of the emigres would be confiscated and that they 
themselves would be treated as enemies, as guilty of treasonable 
conspiracy, if their armaments were not dispersed by January'- i, 



TROUBLED FOREIGN RELATIONS 159 

1792 ; also stating that the French princes and pubUc officials who 
had emigrated should be likewise regarded as conspiring against the 
state and would be exposed to the penalty of death, if they did not 
return by the same date. 

Louis XVI vetoed these decrees. He did, however, order his two 
brothers to return to France. They refused to obey out of "tender- 
ness" for the King. The Count of Provence, who had a gift ^^^^ ^^^ 
for misplaced irony and impertinence, saw fit to exercise it in vetoes these 
his reply to the Assembly's summons. If this was not pre- ^"®^^ 
cisely pouring oil upon troubled waters, it was precisely adding fuel 
to a mounting conflagration, perhaps a natural mode of action for 
those who are dancing on volcanoes. Prudent people prefer to do 
their dancing elsewhere. 

More serious were the war clouds that were rapidly gathering. At 
the beginning of the Revolution nothing seemed less likely than a con- 
flict between France and Europe. France was pacifically in- Gathering 
clined, and there were no outstanding subjects of dispute. ^^'^ clouds 
Moreover the rulers of the other countries were not at all anxious 
to intervene. They were quite willing to have France occupied 
exclusively with domestic problems, as thus the field would be left 
open for their intrigues. They were meditating the final partition 
of Poland and wished to be let alone while they committed that 
crowning iniquity. But gradually they came to see the menace to 
themselves in the new principles proclaimed by the French, principles 
of the sovereignty of the people and of the equality of all citizens. 
Their own subjects, particularly the peasants and the middle classes, 
were alarmingly enthusiastic over the achievements of the French. 
If such principles should inspire the same deeds as in France, the 
absolute monarchy of Louis XVI would not be the only one to suffer 
a shock. 

FRANCE AND THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

Just as the sovereigns were being somewhat aroused from this com- 
placent indifference in regard to their neighbor's principles, a change 
was going on in France itself, where certain parties were beginning 
to proclaim their duty to share their happiness with other peoples, in 
other words, to conduct a propaganda for their ideas outside of 
France. They were talking of the necessity of warring against 
tyrants, and of liberating peoples still enslaved. 



i6o THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

Thus on both sides the temper was becoming warlike. When such 
a mood prevails it is never difficult for willing minds to find sufficient 
pretexts for an appeal to arms. Moreover each side had a definite 
and positive grievance. France, as we have seen, viewed with dis- 
pleasure and concern the formation of the royalist armies on her 
eastern borders, with the connivance, or at least the consent, of the 
The problem German princes. On the other hand, the German Empire 
of Alsace had a direct grievance against France. When Alsace became 
French in the seventeenth century, a number of German princes 
possessed lands there, and were, in fact, feudal lords. They still 
remained princes of the German Empire, and their territorial rights 
were guaranteed by the treaties. Only they were at the same time 
vassals of the King of France, doing homage to him and collecting 
feudal dues, as previously. When the French abolished feudal dues 
as we have seen, August 4, 1789, they insisted that these decrees 
applied to Alsace as well -as to the rest of France. The German 
princes protested and asserted that the decrees were in violation of 
the Treaty of Westphalia. The German Diet espoused their cause. 
The Constituent Assembly insisted upon maintaining its laws, in 
large measure, but offered to modify them. The Diet refused, 
.demanding the revocation of the obnoxious laws and the restoration 
of the feudal dues in Alsace. The controversy was full of danger 
for the reason that there were many people, both in France and in the 
other countries, who were anxious for war and who would use any 
means they could to bring it about. The gale was gathering which 
was to sweep over Europe in memorable devastation for nearly a 
quarter of a century. 

The Legislative Assembly was composed of inexperienced men, be- 
cause of the self-denying ordinance passed in the closing hours of the 
Constituent Assembly. Yet this Assembly was vested by the new 
Constitution with powers vastly overshadowing those left with the 
King. Nevertheless it was suspicious of him, as it had no control 
over the ministry and as it was the executive that directed the 
relations with foreign countries. 

THE RISE OF POLITICAL CLUBS 

There were, moreover, certain new factors in domestic politics of 
which the world was to hear much in the coming months. Several 
political clubs began to loom up threateningly as possible rivals 



THE JACOBIN CLUB 



i6i 



even of the Assembly. The two most conspicuous were the Jacobin 
and the Cordeher clubs. These had originated at the very beginning 
of the Revolution, but it was under the Legislative Assembly and 
its successor that they showed their power. 

The Jacobin Club was destined to the greater notoriety. It was 
composed of members of the Assembly and of outsiders, citizens of 
Paris. As a political club the members held constant sessions 
and debated with great zeal and freedom the questions which jacobin 
were before the Assembly. Its most influential leader at this " 
time was Robespierre (robes-pyar'), a radical democrat but at the 




TuL Jaldbin Cli. b 
From a Dutch engraving, after Duplessis-Bertaux. 

same time a convinced monarchist, a vigorous opponent of the small 
republican party which had appeared momentarily at the time of 
the epoch-making flight to Varennes. The Jacobin Club grew 
steadily more radical as the Revolution progressed and as its more 
conservative members dropped out or were eliminated. It also 
rapidly extended its influence over all France. Jacobin clubs 



1 62 



THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 



were founded in over 2000 cities and villages. Affiliated with the 
mother club in Paris, they formed a vast network, virtually receiving 
orders from Paris, developing great talent for concerted action. The 
discipline that held this voluntary organization together was re- 
markable and rendered it capable of great and decisive action. It 
became a sort of state within the state and, moreover, within a state 
which was as decentralized and ineffective as it was itself highly 
centralized and rapid and thorough in its action. The Jacobin Club 




A Session at the jAcoBrNf Club 
After an anonymous engraving. 

gradually became a rival of the Assembly itself and at times exerted 
a preponderant influence upon it, yet the Assembly was the legally 
constituted government of all France. 

The Cordelier Club was still more radical. Its membership was 
derived from a lower social scale. It was more democratic. More- 
The Corde- over, since the flight to Varennes it was the hotbed of republi- 
lier Club canism. Its chief influence was with the working classes of 

Paris, men who were enthusiastic supporters of the Revolution, 
anxious to have it carried farther, easily inflamed against any one 
who was accused as an enemy, open or secret, of the Revolution. 
These men were crude and rude but tremendously energetic. They 



THE GROWTH OF DEMOCRATIC SENTIMENT 163 




were the stuff of which mobs could be made, and the}' had in Danton 
(dan-tun'), a lawyer, with an exceptional power of downright and 
epigrammatic speech, an able, astute, and ruthless leader. The 
Cordelier Club, unlike the Jacobin, was limited to Paris ; it had no 
branches throughout the departments. Like the Jacobins the 
Cordeliers contracted the habit of bringing physical pressure to bear 
upon the Government, of seeking to impose their will upon that of 
the representatives of the nation, the King and the Assembly. 

Here then were redoubtable machines for influencing the public. 
They would support the Assembly as long as its conduct met their 
wishes, but the}' were self-confident and 
self-willed enough to oppose it and to trj^ and the 
to dominate it on occasion. Both were Legislative 

. . . Assembly 

enthusiastic believers in the Revolution ; 
both were lynx-eyed and keen-scented for any 
hostility to the Revolution, willing to go to any 
lengths to uncover and to crush those who 
should try to undo the reforms thus far accom- 
plished. Both were suspicious of the King. 

They had inflammable material enough to 
work upon in the masses of the great capital of 

France. And these masses were, as the _. „ 

' The pa- 

months went by, becoming steadily more triots " of 

excitable and exalted in temper. They *"^ 
worshiped liberty frantically and they expressed 
their worship in picturesque and sinister ways. 
They called themselves the true "patriots," 
and, like all fanatics, they were highly jealous 
and suspicious of their more moderate fellow-citizens. They dis- 
played the revolutionary colors, the tricolor cockade, everywhere 
and on all occasions. They adopted and wore the bonnet rouge or 
red-cap, which resembled the Phrygian cap of antiquity, the cap 
worn by slaves after their emancipation. This was now, as it had 
been then, the sj^mbol of liberty. 

This is the period, too, when we hear of the planting of liberty poles 
or trees everywhere amid popular acclamation and with festivities cal- 
culated to intensify the new-born democratic devotion. Even xhe Sans 
in dress the new era had its radical innovations and symbolism, culottes 
The Sansculottes now set the style. They were the men who aban- 



LiBERTY Cap 
Pike 



i64 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

doned the old style short breeches, the culottes, and adopted the 
long trousers hitherto worn only by workingmen and therefore a 
badge of social inferiority. 

Such then was the new quality in the atmosphere, such were the 

new players who were grouped around the margins of the scene. 

Their influence was felt all through its year of fevered history by the 

Legislative Assembly, the lawful government of France. These 

men were all aglow with the great news announced in the Declaration 

of the Rights of Man, that the people are sovereign here below 

Increasing ^^^^ j-^^t no divinity doth hedge about a king — that was 

the Legisia- shccr claptrap which had imposed on mankind quite long 

semw^' enough. Now that France was delivered from this sorry 

hallucination, now that the darkness was dispelled, let the 

new principles be fearlessly applied ! 

The effect of all this upon the Legislative Assembly was pro- 
nounced. One of the first actions of that Assembly was to abolish the 
terms, "Sire" and "Your Majesty," used in addressing the King.. 
Another evidence that the new doctrine of the sovereignty of the 
people was not merely a rosy, yet unsubstantial, figment of the 
imagination, but was a definite principle intended to be applied to 
daily politics, was the fact that when dissatisfied with the Assembly 
the people crowded into its hall more frequently, expressing their 
disapproval, voicing in unambiguous manner their desires, and the 
Assembly, which believed in the doctrine too, did not dare resent its 
application, did not dare assert its inviolability, as the representative 
of France, of law and order. 

The signs of the times, then, were certainly not propitious for those 
who would undo the work of the Revolution, who would restore the 
The emigres ^"^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ nobles to the position they had once occupied 
play with and now lost. The pack would be upon them if they tried. 
The struggle would be with a rude and vigorous democracy 
in which reverence for the old had died, which was reckless of tradi- 
tions, and was ready to suffer and more ready to inflict suffering, 
if attempts were made to thwart it. Anything that looked like 
treachery would mean a popular explosion. Yet this moment, so 
inopportune, was being used by the King and Queen in secret but sus- 
pected machinations with foreign rulers, with a view to securing their 
aid in the attempt to recover the ground lost by the monarchy ; was 
being used by the emigrant nobles in Coblenz (k5'-blents) and 



THE GIRONDISTS 



I ('5 



Worms (vorms) for counter-revolutionary intrigues and for warlike 
preparations. Their only safe policy was a candid and unmistakable 
recognition of the new regime, but this was precisely what they were 
intellectually and temperamentally incapable of appreciating. They 




]\Tadamf. Roland 

A portrait taken from the cover of a bonbonniere in the Carnavalet Museum. 
E. F. Henderson's Symbol and Satire in the French Revolution. 



From 



were playing with fire. This was all the more risky as many of their 

enemies were equally willing to play with the same dangerous element. 

There was in the Legislative Assembly a group of men called the 

Girondists, because many of their leaders, Vergniaud (vem-yo'), 



i66 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

Isnard (is-nar'), Buzot, and others, came from that section of France 
known as the Gironde, in the southwest of France. The Girondists 
The have enjoyed a poetic immortahty ever since imaginative his- 

Girondists tories of the Revolution issued from the pensive pen of the 
poet Lamartine, who portrayed them as pure and high-minded 
patriots caught in the swirl of a wicked world. The description was 
inaccurate. They were not disinterested martyrs in the cause of 
good government. They were a group of politicians whose discretion 
was not as conspicuous as their ambition. They paid for that vault- 
ing emotion the price which it frequently exacts. They knew how 
to make their tragic exit from life bravely and heroically. They did 
not know, what is more difficult, how to make their lives wise and 
profitable to the world. They were a group of eloquent young men, 
led by a romantic young woman. For the real head of this group 
that had its hour upon the stage and then was heard no more in the 
deafening clamor of the later Revolution was Madame Roland, 
their bright particular star. Theirs was a bookish outlook upon the 
world. They fed upon Plutarch, and boundless was their admiration 
for the ancient Greeks and Romans. They were republicans because 
those glorious figures of the earlier time had been republicans ; also 
because they imagined that, in a republic, they would themselves 
find a better chance to shine and to irradiate the world. Dazzled 
by these prototypes, they burned with the spirit of emulation. The 
reader must keep steadily in mind that the Girondists and the 
Jacobins were entirely distinct groups. They were, indeed, destined 
later to be deadly rivals and enemies. 

OPENING OF A LONG WAR, APRIL 20, 1792 

Such were the personages who played their dissimilar parts in the 
hot drama of the times. The stage was set. The background was 
the whole fabric of the European state system, now shaking 
Clares war on unawares. The action began with the declaration of war by 
Austria France against Francis II, ruler of Austria, and nephew of 

Marie Antoinette, a declaration which opened a war which was to 
be European and world-wide, which was to last twenty-three long 
years, was to deform and twist the Revolution out of all resem- 
blance to its earl}?- promise, was, as by-products, to give France a 
Republic, a Reign of Terror, a Napoleonic empire, a Bourbon over- 



WAR WITH AUSTRIA 167 

throw and restoration, and was to end only with the catastrophic 
incident of Waterloo. 

That war was precipitated by the French, who sent an ultimatum to 
the Emperor concerning the emigres. Francis replied by demanding 
the restoration to the German princes in Alsace of their feudal rights, 
and, in addition, the repression in France "of anything that might 
alarm other States." War was declared on April 20, 1792. It was 
desired by all the parties of the Legislative Assembly. Only seven 
members voted against it. The supporters of the King Favored 
wanted it, believing that it would enable him to recover power ^^ ^" parties 

'^^ in the 

once more by rendermg him popular as the leader in a victorious Legislative 
campaign and by putting at his disposal a strong military ^^^^^^'^ 
force. Girondists and Jacobins wanted it for precisely the opposite 
reason, as likely to prove that Louis was secretly a traitor, in intimate 
relations with the enemies of France. This once established, the 
monarchy could be swept aside and a republic installed. Only 
Robespierre and a few others opposed it on the ground that war 
always plays into the hands of the rich and powerful, that the opposed by 
people, on the other hand, the poor, always pay for it and lose Robespierre 
rather than gain, that war is never in the interest of a democracy. 
They were, however, voices crying in the wilderness. There was a 
widespread feeling that the war was an inevitable clash between 
democracy, represented by France under the new dispensation, and 
autocracy, represented by the House of Hapsburg, a conflict of two 
eras, the past and the future. The national exaltation was such 
that the people welcomed the opportunity to. spread abroad, beyond 
the borders of France, the revolutionary ideas of liberty and equality 
which they had so recently acquired and which they so highly prized. 
The war had some of the characteristics of a religious war, the same 
mental exaltation, the same dogmatic belief in the universal applica- 
bility of its doctrines, the same sense of duty to preach them everv- 
where ; by force, if necessary. 

This war was a startling and momentous turning point in the 
history of the Revolution. It had consequences, some of which 
were foreseen, most of which were not. It reacted profoundly turning'point 
upon the French and before it was over it compromised their '"^ modern 
own domestic liberty and generated a military despotism of 
greater efficiency than could be matched in the long history of the 
House of Bourbon. 



i68 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

First and foremost among the effects of the war was this : it swept 
the illustrious French monarchy away and put the monarchs to 
At the death. The war began disastrously. Instead of easily con- 

beginning quering Belgium, which belonged to Francis II, as they had 

the French ^,, , it^ , ^ ^ 

suffer confidently expected to, the French suffered severe reverses. 

reverses q^^ reason was that their army had been badly disorganized 

by the wholesale resignation or emigration of its officers, all noble- 
men. Another was the highly treasonable act of Louis XVI and 
Marie Antoinette, who informed the Austrians of the French plan 
of campaign. This treason of their sovereigns was not known to the 
French, but it was suspected, and it was none the less efficacious. 



INSURRECTIONS 

At the same time that French armies were being driven back, 
civil war, growing out of the religious dissensions, was threatening in 
Two decrees France. The Assembly, facing these troubles, indignantly 
A '^^ bi passed two decrees, one ordering the deportation to penal 

vetoed by colonies of all refractory or non-juring priests, the other pro- 
Louis XVI viding for an army of 20,000 men for the protection of Paris. 
Louis XVI vetoed both measures. Then the storm broke. The 
Jacobins inspired and organized a great popular demonstration 
Insurrection against the King, the object being to force him to sign the 
of June 20, decrees. Out from the crowded workingmen's quarters 
^^^^ emerged, on June 20, 1792, several thousand men, wearing 

the bonnet rouge, armed with pikes and carrying standards with the 
Rights of Man printed on them. They went to the hall of the 
Assembly and were permitted to march through it, submitting a 
petition in which the pointed statement was made that the will of 
25,000,000 people could not be balked by the will of one man. After 
leaving the hall the crowd went to the Tuileries, forced open the 
gates and penetrated to the King's own apartments. The King 
for three hours stood before them, in the recess of a window, pro- 
tected by some of the deputies. The crowd shouted, "Sign the de- 
crees !" " Down with the priests !" One of the ringleaders of the 
demonstration, a butcher called Legendre, gained a notoriety that 
has sufficed to preserve his name from oblivion to this day, by 
shouting at the King, "Sir, you are a traitor, you have always de- 
ceiyed us, you are deceiving us still. Beware, the cup is full." 



BRUNSWICK'S MANIFESTO 169 

Louis XVI refused to make any promises. His will, for once, did 
not waver. But he received a bonnet rouge and drank a glass of 
wine presented him by one of the crowd. The crowd finally Louis xvi 
withdrew, having committed no violence, but having sub- remains firm 
jected the King of France to bitter humihation. 

Immediately a wave of indignation at this affront and scandal 
swept over France and it seemed likely that, after all, it might re- 
dound to the advantage of Louis, increasing his popularity by the 
sympathy it evoked. But shortly other events occurred and The Duke 
his position became more precarious than ever. Prussia ^^j^^'^^^ani- 
joined Austria in the war, and the Duke of Brunswick, com- festo (July 
mander of the coalition armies, as he crossed the frontiers of "' "'^' 
France, issued a manifesto which aroused the people to a fever pitch 
of wrath. This manifesto had really been written by an emigre and 
it was redolent of the concentrated rancor of his class. The manifesto 
ordered the French to restore Louis XVI to complete liberty of action. 
It went farther and virtually commanded them to obey the orders of 
the monarchs of Austria and Prussia. It announced that any 
national guards who should resist the advance of the allies would be 
punished as rebels and it wound up with the terrific threat that if the 
least violence or outrage should be offered to their Majesties, the 
King, the Queen, and the royal famil}', if their preservation and their 
libert}^ should not be immediately provided for, they, the allied 
monarchs, would "exact an exemplary and ever memorable ven- 
geance," namely, the complete destruction of the city of Paris. 

Such a threat could have but one reply from a self-respecting 
people. It nerved them to incredible exertions to resent and repay 
the insult. Patriotic anger swept everything before it. 

The first to suffer was the person whom the manifesto had singled 
out for special care, Louis XVI, now suspected more than ever of being 
the accomplice of these invaders who were breathing fire and destruc- 
tion upon the French for the insolence of managing their own 
affairs as they saw fit. On August 10, 1792, another, and this rection^of 

time more formidable, insurrection, occurred in Paris. At August 10 

1792 
nine in the morning the crowd attacked the Tuileries. At 

ten the King and the royal family left the palace and sought safety 

in the Assembly. There they were kept in a little room, just behind 

the president's chair, and there they remained for more than thirty 

hours. While the Assembly was debating, a furious combat was 



I70 



THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 



-r 



.xajB*jii. . iSkii. 




THE TUILERIES SACKED 171 

raging between the troops stationed to guard the Tuileries and the 
mob. Louis XVI, hearing the first shots, sent word to the guards to 
cease fire, but the officer who carried the command did not deliver it as 
long as he thought there was a chance of victory. The Swiss Guards 
were the heroes and the victims of that dreadful day. They de- 
fended the palace until their ammunition gave out and then, receiv- 
ing the order to retire, they fell back slowly, but were soon over- 
whelmed by their assailants and 800 of them were shot down. The 
vengeance of the mob was frenzied. They themselves had lost 
hundreds of men. No quarter was given. More than 5000 
people were killed that day. The Tuileries was sacked and Tuileries 
gutted. A sallow-complexioned young artillery officer, out ^^'^^^'^ 
of service, named Napoleon Bonaparte, was a spectator of this scene, 
from which he learned a few lessons which were later of value to him. 



THE REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNE OF PARIS 

The deeds of August 10 were the work of the Revolutionary Com- 
mune of Paris. The former municipal government had been illegally 
overthrown by the Jacobins, who had then organized a new govern- 
ment which they entirely controlled. The Jacobins, the masters of 
Paris, had carefully prepared the insurrection of August 10 for the 
definite purpose of overthrowing Louis XVL The menaces of the 
Duke of Brunswick had merely been the pretext. Now began that 
systematic dominance of Paris in the affairs of France which was 
to be brief but terrible. At the end of the insurrection the „. 

Ine sus- 

Commune forced the Legislative Assembly to do its wishes, pension of 
Under this imperious and entirely illegal dictation the Assembly ^^^ ^^^ 
voted that the King should be provisionally suspended. This neces- 
sitated the making of a new constitution, as the Constitution of 
1 79 1 was monarchical. The present assembly was a merely ^t^°n^/'' 
legislative body, not competent to alter the fundamental law. Convention 
Therefore the Legislative Assembly, although its term had 
only half expired, decided to call a Convention to take up the matter 
of the constitution. Under orders from the Paris Commune it issued 
the decree to that effect and it made a further important decision. 
For elections to the Convention it abolished the property suffrage, 
established by the Constitution of 1791, and proclaimed universal 
suffrage. France thus, on August 10, 1792, became a democracy. 



172 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 

The executive of France was thus overthrown. During the interval 
before the meeting of the Convention a provisional executive council, 
with Danton at the head, wielded the executive power, influ- 
mune^m-" enccd by the Commune. The Assembly had merely voted 
prisons the ^^g suspcnsion of Louis XVI. The Commune, in complete 
disregard of law and in defiance of the Assembly, imprisoned the 
King and Queen in the Temple, an old fortress in Paris. The Com- 
mune also arrested large numbers of suspected persons. 

This Revolutionary Commune or City Council of Paris was hence- 
forth one of the powerful factors in the government of France. It, 
and not the Legislative Assembly, was the real ruler of the country 
during the interval between the suspension of the King on August lo 
and the meeting of the Convention, September 20. It continued to 
be a factor, sometimes predominant, even under the Convention. 
For nearly two years, from August, 1792, until the overthrow of 
Robespierre on July 27, 1794, the Commune was one of the principal 
The Com- forces in politics. It signalized its advent by suppressing the 
°h*r^h h freedom of the press, one of the precious conquests of the re- 
freedom of form movement, by defying the committees of the Assembly 
the press when it chose, and by carrying through the infamous September 
Massacres, which left a monstrous and indelible stain upon the 
Revolution. The Commune was the representative of the lower 
classes and of the Jacobins. Its leaders were all extremely radical, 
and some were desperate characters who would stop at nothing to 
gain their ends. 

THE SEPTEMBER MASSACRES 

The September Massacres grew out of the feeling of panic which 
seized the population of Paris as it heard of the steady approach of 
the Prussians and Austrians under the Duke of Brunswick. Hun- 
dreds of persons, suspected or charged with being real accomplices 
of the invaders, were thrown into prison. Finally the news reached 
Paris that Verdun (ver-dun') was besieged, the last fortress on the 
road to the capital. If that should fall, then the enemy would have 

Organized ^^^ ^ ^^^ days' march to accomplish and Paris would be theirs. 

by the The Commune and the Assembly made heroic exertions to 

Commune . , . , ■, ■ ■ r^-, ^ 

raise and forward troops to the exposed position. The Com- 
mune, sounded the tocsin or general alarm from the bell towers, and 
unfurled a gigantic black flag from the City Hall bearing the inscrip- 



THE SEPTEMBER MASSACRES 



173 



tion, "The Countrj' is in Danger." The more violent members 
began to say that before the troops were sent to the front the traitors 
within the city ought to be put out of the way. "Shall we go to the 
front, leaving 3000 
prisoners behind us, 
who may escape and 
murder our wives 
and children?" they 
asked. The hideous 
spokesman and in- 
citer of the foul and 
cowardly slaughter 
was Marat (ma-rii'), 
one of the most 
bloodthirsty charac- 
ters of the time. 
The result was that 
day after day, from 
September 2 to Sep- 
tember 6, the cold- 
blooded murder of 
non-juring priests, of 
persons suspected or 
accused of "aristoc- 
racy," went on, with- 
out trial, the innocent 
and the guilty, men 
and women. The 
butchery was sys- 
tematically clone by 

men hired and paid by certain members of the Commune. The 
Legislative Assembly was too terrified itself to attempt to impotence of 
stop the infamous business nor could it have done so, had it ^j^®^ egisa- 
tried. Nearly 1200 persons were thus savagely hacked to Assembly 
pieces by the colossal barbarism of those days. 

One consequence of these massacres was to discredit the cause of 
the Revolution. Another was to precipitate a sanguinary struggle 
between the Girondists, who wished to punish the " Septembrists " 
and particularly their instigator, Marat, and the Jacobins, who 




The Prisdn of the Temple 
i\fter an anonymous engraving. 



174 



THE LEGISLATIVE ASSE^IBLV 



either defended them or as- 
sumed an attitude of indiffer- 
ence, urging that France 

Effects of , , • . . 

theSeptem- had morc important 
berMassa- work to do than to 
spend its time trying to 
avenge men who were after all 
"aristocrats." The struggles 
between these factions were to 
fill the early months of the 
Convention which met on 
September 20, 1792, the elec- 
tions having taken place under 
the gloomy and terrifying im- 
pressions produced by the 
September Massacres. On 
the same da}^ September 20, 
the Prussians were stopped in 
their onward march at Valmj' 
(val-me'). They were to get 
no farther. The immediate 
relieved. 




ilAEAT 



danger was over. The tension was 



REFERENCES 

The Legislative Assembly : Mathews, The French Revolution, pp. 182-190. 

Beginning of the War with Europe: Mathews, pp. 191-199; Fyffe, 
History of Modern Europe (Popular Edition), Chap. I; Bourne, The Revolu- 
tionary Period in, Europe, pp. 150-168; Robinson and Beard, Readings in- 
Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 282-294. 

The Jacobin Club : Farmer, Essays in French History (The Club of the 
Jacobins). 

The Tenth of August and the September Massacres : Mathews, pp. 
199-214; Stephens, History of the French Revolution, Vol. II, pp. 107-150; 
Bourne, pp. 173-183. 



CHAPTER VIII 

THE CONVENTION 

The third Revolutionary assembly was the National Convention, 
which was in existence for three years, from September 20, 1792, to 
October 26, 1795. Called to draft a new constitution, neces- . . . 

' ' ^^ ' Achieve- 

sitated by the suspension of Louis XVI, its first act was the ments of the 
abolition of monarchy as an institution. Before its final •"^^^^^tion 
adjournment three years later it had drafted two different constitu- 
tions, one of which was never put in force, it had established a 
republic, it had organized a provisional government with which 
to face the appalling problems that confronted the country, it had 
maintained the integrity and independence of the country, threatened 
by complete dissplution, and had decisively defeated a vast hostile 
coalition of European powers. In accomplishing this gigantic task 
it had, however, made a record for cruelty and tyranny that left 
the republic in deep discredit and made the Revolution odious to 
multitudes of men. 

FRANCE TROCLAIMED A REPUBLIC 

On September 21, 1792, the Convention voted unanimously that 
"royalty is abolished in France." The following day it voted that all 
public documents should henceforth be dated from ' ' the first year of 
the French Republic." Thus unostentatiously did the Republic 
make its appearance upon the scene, "furtively interjecting itself 
between the factions," as Robespierre expressed it. There was no 
solemn proclamation of the Republic, merely the indirect statement. 
As Aulard observes, the Convention had the air of saying to the 
nation, "There is no possibility of doing otherwise." Later the 
Republic had its heroes, its victims, its martyrs, but it was created 
in the first instance simply because there was nothing else to do. 
France had no choice in the matter. It merely accepted an im- 
perative situation. A committee was immediately appointed to 

175 



176 THE CONVENTION 

draw up a new constitution. Its work, however, was long post- 
poned, for the Convention was distracted by a frenzied quarrel 
that broke out immediately between two parties, the Giron- 

stmggies dists and Jacobins. The latter party was often called the 

in the Mountain, because of the raised seats its members occupied. 

It is not easy to define the differences between these fac- 
tions, which were involved in what was fundamentally a struggle 
for power. Both were entirely devoted to the Republic. Between 
the two factions there was a large group of members, who swung 
now this way and now that, carrying victory or defeat as they shifted 
their votes. They were the center, the Plain or the Marsh, as they 
were called because of the location of their seats in the convention 
hall. 

On one point, the part that the city of Paris should be permitted to 

play in the government, the difference of opinion was sharp. The 

Girondists represented the departments and insisted that Paris, 

d^ts^''^"'^ which constituted only one of the eighty-three departments 
into which France was divided, should have only one-eighty- 
third of influence. They would tolerate no dictatorship of the 
capital. On the other hand, the Jacobins drew their strength from 
Paris. They considered Paris the brain and the heart of the country, 
a center of light to the more backward provinces ; they believed that 
it was the proper and predestined leader of the nation, that it was in 
a better position than was the country at large to appreciate the 
significance of measures and events, that it was, as Dan ton said, " the 
chief sentinel of the nation." The Girondists were anxious to observe 
legal forms and processes ; they disliked and distrusted the frequent 

^. T ^- appeals to brute force. The Jacobins, on the other hand, were 

The Jacobins ^^ j > > 

not so scrupulous. They were rude, active, forceful, indif- 
ferent to law, if law stood in the way. They were realists and 
believed in the application of force wherever and whenever necessary. 
Indeed their great emphasis was always put upon the necessity of 
the state. That justified everything. In other words anything was 
legitimate that might contribute to the safety or greatness of the 
Republic, whether legal or not. 

But the merely personal element was even more important in divid- 
ing and envenoming these groups. The Girondists hated the three 
leaders of the Jacobins, Robespierre, Marat, and Danton. Marat 
and Robespierre returned the hatred, which was thus easily fanned 



PARTY STRUGGLES IN THE CONVENTION 177 



to fever heat. Danton, a man of coarse fiber but large mold, 
above the pettiness of jealousy and pique, thought chiefly and 
instinctively only of the cause, the interest of the country at j^^^^^^ 
the given moment. He had no scruples but he had a keen 
sense for the practical and the useful. He was anxious to work 
with the Girondists, anxious to smooth over situations, to avoid 
extremes, to subordinate per- 
sons to measures, to ignore the 
spirit of faction and intrigue, 
to keep all republicans work- 
ing together in the same har- 
ness for the welfare of France. 
His was the spirit of easy- 
going compromise. But he 
met in the Girondists a stern, 
unyielding opposition. They 
would have nothing to do with 
him, they would not cooperatr 
with him, and they, finall\ 
ranged him among their ene- 
mies, to their own irreparable 
harm and to his. 

The contest between these 
two parties grew shriller and 
more vehement every day, 
ending in a life and death 
struggle. It began directly 
after the meeting of the Con- 
vention, in the discussion as to what should be done with Louis 
XVI, now that monarchy was abolished and the monarch a prisoner 
of state. 

TRIAL AND EXECUTION OF LOUIS XVI 

The King had unquestionably been disloyal to the Revolution. 
He had given encouragement to the emigres and had entered into the 
hostile plans of the enemies of France. After the meeting of the ^j^^ ^^ 
Convention a secret iron box, fashioned by his own hand, had and the 
been discovered in the Tuileries containing documents which 
proved beyond question his treason. Ought he to have the full 




Danton 

From an engraving by J. Caron, after the 
painting by David. 



178 



THE CONVENTION 



The Jaco- 
bins demand 
his execution 
without trial 



punishment of a traitor or had he been already sufficiently punished, 
by the repeated indignities to which he had been subjected, by im- 
prisonment, and by the loss of his throne? Might not the Conven- 
tion stay its hand, refrain from exacting the full measure of satis- 
faction from one so sorely visited and for whom so many excuses 
lay in the general goodness of his character and in the extraordinary 
perplexities of his position, perplexities which might have baffled a 
far wiser person, at a time when the men of clearest vision saw events 
as through a glass, darkly ? But mercy was not in the hearts of men, 
particularly of the Jacobins, who considered Louis the chief culprit 

and unworthy of consideration. The Jacobins at first would 

not hear even of a trial. 



Robespierre demanded 

that the King be exe- 
cuted forthwith by a mere 
vote of the Convention, and 
Saint-Just (sah-zhiist'), a 
satellite of Robespierre, re- 
called that "Caesar was des- 
patched in the very presence 
of the Senate without other 
formality than twenty-two 
. dagger strokes." But Louis 
was given a trial, a trial, how- 
ever, before a packed jury, 
which had already shown its 
hatred of him, before men 
who were at the same time 
his accusers and his judges. 
The trial lasted over a month, 
Louis himself appearing at 
the bar, answering the thirty- 
three questions which were put 
to him and which covered his 
conduct during the Revolution. His statements were considered un- 
The trial of Satisfactory. Despite the eloquent defense of his lawyer the 

Convention voted on January 15, 1793, that "Louis Capet" 
was "guilty of conspiracy against the liberty of the Nation and of a 
criminal attack upon the safety of the state. " The vote was unani- 




Last Portrait of Louis XVI 

After a crayon by Ducreux, three days before 
the execution. 



Louis XVI 



THE TRIAL OF LOUIS XVI 179 

mous, a few abstaining from voting but not one voting in the nega- 
tive. Many of the Girondists then urged that the sentence be sub- 
mitted to the people for their final action. Robespierre combated 
this idea with vigor, evidently fearing that the people would not go 
the whole length. This proposition was voted down by 424 votes 
against 283. 

What should be the punishment ? Voting on this question began 
at eight o'clock in the evening of January 16, 1793. During twenty- 
four hours the 721 deputies present mounted the platform one after 
the other, and announced their votes to the Convention. At eight 
o'clock on the evening of the 17th the vote was completed. The 
president announced the result. Number voting, 721 ; a majority, 
361. For death, 387 ; against death, or for delay, 334. 

On Sunday, January 21, the guillotine was raised in the square 
fronting the Tuileries. At ten o'clock Louis mounted the fatal steps 
with courage and composure. He was greater on the scaffold _. 
than he had been upon the throne. He endeavored to speak, tion of the 
"Gentlemen, I am innocent of that of which I am accused. "^^ 
May my blood assure the happiness of the French." His voice was 
drowned by a roll of drums. He died with all the serenity of a 
profoundly religious man. 

COALITION OF NATIONS AGAINST FRANCE 

The immediate consequence of the execution was a formidable in- 
crease in the number of enemies France must conquer if she was to 
live, and an intensification of the passions involved. France Occasioned 
was already at war with Austria and Prussia. Now England, ecu*don^of 
Russia, Spain, Holland, and the states of Germany and Italy Louis xvi 
entered the war against her, justifying themselves by the "murder of 
the King," although all had motives much more practical than this 
sentimental one. It was an excellent opportunity to gain territory 
from a country which was plainly in process of dissolution. Civil 
war, too, was added to the turmoil, as the peasants of the Vendee, 
100,000 strong, rose against the Republic which was the murderer of 
the king and the persecutor of the church. Dumouriez (dii-mo-rya'), 
an able commander of one of the French armies, was plotting against 
the Convention and was shortly to go over to the enemy, a traitor to 
his country. 



i8o 



THE CONVENTION 



.^.'ZSMkiJI^ 




The Con- 
vention 



STRONG GOVERNMENT i8i 

The ground was giving way everywhere. The Convention stiffened 
for the fray, resolved to do or die, or both, if necessary. No govern- 
ment was ever more energetic or more dauntless. It voted to raise 
300,000 troops immediately. It created a Committee of ,j.. 
General Security, a Committee of Public Safety, a Revolu- vention 
tionary Tribunal, all parts of a machine that was intended chlnl^^r' 
to concentrate the full force of the nation upon the problem strong gov- 
of national salvation and the annihilation of the republic's *™"®'^* 
enemies, whether foreign or domestic. 

But while it was doing all this the Convention was floundering in 
the bog of angry party politics. Dissension was beginning its work of 
dividing the republicans, preparatory to consuming them. The first 
struggle was between the Girondists and the Jacobins. The Giron- 
dists wished to punish the men who had been responsible for the 
September Massacres. They wished to punish the Commune for 
numerous illegal acts. They hated Marat and were able to get 
a vote from the Convention sending him before the Revolution- 
ary Tribunal, expecting that this would be the end of him. divided by 
Instead, he was acquitted and became the hero of the populace 
of Paris, more powerful than before and now wilder than ever in his 
denunciations. Sanguinary Marat, feline Robespierre, were resolved 
on the annihilation of the Girondists. Danton, thinking of France 
and loathing all this discord, when the nation was in danger, all 
this exaggeration of self, this contemptible carnival of intrigue, 
thinking that Frenchmen had enemies enough to fight without tear- 
ing each other to pieces, tried to play the' peacemaker. But he 
had the fate that peacemakers frequently have. He accomplished 
nothing for France and made enemies for himself. 



COMMUNE ORGANIZES INSURRECTION AGAINST GIRONDISTS 

The Commune, which supported the Jacobins, and which idolized 
Marat and respected Robespierre, intervened in this struggle, using, 
to cut it short, its customary weapon, physical force. It organized 
an insurrection against the Girondists, a veritable army of 80,000 
men with sixty cannon. Marat, himself a member of the Conven- 
tion, climbed to the belfry of the City Hall and with his own hand 
sounded the tocsin. This was Marat's day. He, self-styled Friend 
of the People, was the leader of this movement from the beginning 



i82 THE CONVENTION 

to the end of the fateful June 2, 1793. The Tuileries, where the 

Convention sat, was surrounded by the insurrectionary troops. 

The Convention was the prisoner of the Commune, the Government 

of France at the mercy of the Government of Paris. The Commune 

Girondist demanded the expulsion of the Girondist leader from the Con- 

leaders vcntion. The Convention protested indignantly against the 

from the conduct of the insurgents. Its members resolved to leave the 

Convention j^^jj -j^ ^ body. They were received with mock deference by 

the insurgents. The demand of their president that the troops 

disperse was bluntly refused until the Girondists who had been 

denounced should be expelled. The Convention was obliged to 

return to its hall conquered and degraded and to vote the arrest 

of twentj^-nine Girondists. For the first time in the Revolution the 

assembly elected by the voters of France was mutilated. Violence 

had laid its hand upon the sovereignty of the people in the interest 

of the rule of a faction. The victory of the Commune was the 

victory of the Jacobins, who, by this treason to the nation, were 

masters of the Convention. 

But not yet masters of the country. Indeed this high-handed 

crime of June 2 aroused indignation and resistance throughout a large 

section of France. Had the departments no rights which 

tiireTtened the Commune of Paris was bound to respect ? The Girondists 

with civU called the departments to arms against this tyrannical crew. 

They responded with alacrity, exasperated and alarmed. 

Four of the largest cities of France, Lyons, Marseilles, Bordeaux, 

and Caen, took up arms, and civil war, born of politics, added to 

the civil war born of religion in the Vendee, and to the ubiquitous 

foreign war, made confusion worse confounded. In all some sixty 

departments out of eighty-three participated in this movement, 

three-fourths of France. To meet this danger, to allay this strong 

distrust of Paris felt by the departments, to show them that they 

need not fear the dictatorship of the Commune, the Convention 

drafted in great haste the constitution which it had been summoned 

to make, but which it had for months ignored in the heat of party 

A new con- politics. And the Constitution of 1793, the second in the 

stitntion history of the Revolution, guarded so carefully the rights of 

constructed the departments and the rights of the people that it made 

Parisian dictation impossible. 



NEW EXPERIMENT IN CONSTITUTION-MAKING 183 

THE CONSTITUTION OF 1793 

The Constitution of 1793 established universal suffrage. It also 
carried decentralization farther than did the Constitution of 1791, 
which had carried it much too far. The Legislature was to ns chief 
be elected only for a year, and all laws were to be submitted to provisions 
the people for ratification or rejection before being put into force. 
This is the first appearance of the referendum. The executive was 




The Hall of the Convention 



to consist of twenty-four members chosen by the legislature out of a 
list drawn up by the electors and consisting of one person from each 
department. 

This constitution worked like a charm in dissipating the distrust of 
the departments. Their rights could not be better- safeguarded. 
Submitted to the voters the constitution was overwhelmingly ratified, 
over 1,000,000 votes in its favor, less than 12,000 in opposition. 
But this is the only way in which this constitution ever worked. 
So thoroughly did it decentralize the state, so weak did it leave the 



i84 THE CONVENTION 

central government, that even those who had accepted it cordially 

saw that it could not be applied immediately, with foreign armies 

The consti- Streaming into France from every direction. What was 

tution needed for the crisis, as every one saw, was a strong govern- 

suspen e rnent. Consequently by general agreement the constitution was 

immediately suspended, as soon as it was made. The suspension was 

to be merely provisional. As soon as the crisis should pass it should 

be put into operation. Meanwhile this precious document was put 

into a box in the center of the convention hall and was much in the 

way. 

THE REIGN OF TERROR 

To meet the crisis, to enable France to hew her way through the 

tangle of complexities and dangers that confronted her, a provisional 

government was created, a government as strong as the one 

The . . 

Convention provided by the constitution was weak, as eflficient as that 
becomes would have proved inefficient. The new system was frankly 

based on force, and it inaugurated a Reign of Terror which 
has remained a hissing and a by-word among the nations 
ever snice. This provisional or revolutionary government was 
lodged in the Convention. The Convention was the sole nerve 
center whence shot forth to the farthest confines of the land 
the iron resolutions that beat down all opposition and fired all 
energies to a single end. The Convention was dictator, and it 
organized a government that was more absolute, more tyrannical, 
more centralized than the Bourbon monarchy, in its palmiest days, 
had ever dreamed of being. Montesquieu's sacred doctrine of the 
separation of powers, which the Constituent Assembly had found so 
excellent, was ignored. 

The machinery of this provisional government consisted of two im- 
portant committees, appointed by the Convention, the Committee of 
Machinery of Public Safety and the Committee of General Security ; also 
sipnaigovern- ^^ Representatives on Mission, of the Revolutionary Tribunal, 
ment and of the political clubs and committees of surveillance in the 

cities and villages throughout the country. 

The Committee of Public Safety consisted at first of nine, later of 
twelve members. Chosen by the Convention for a term of a month, 
its members were, as a matter of fact, reelected month after month, 
changes only occurring when parties changed in the Assembly. Thus 



THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC SAFETY 185 

Danton, upon whose suggestion the original committee had been 
created, was not a member of the enlarged committee, reorganized 
after the expulsion, of the Girondists. He was dropped be- 

Xhc Coin- 

cause he censured the acts of June 2, and his enemy Robespierre mittee of 
became the leading member. At first this committee was ^^^^l'^ 
charged simply with the management of foreign affairs and of 
the army, but in the end it became practically omnipotent, directing 
the state as no single despot had ever done, intervening in every de- 
partment of the nation's affairs, even holding the Convention itself, of 
which in theory it was the creature, in stern and terrified subjection 
to itself. Installing itself in the palace of the Tuileries, in the former 
royal apartments, it developed a prodigious activity, framing endless 
decrees, tossing thousands of men to the guillotine, sending thousands 
upon thousands against the enemies of France, guiding, animating, 
tyrannizing ruthlessly a people which had taken such pains to declare 
itself free, only to find its fragile liberties, so resoundingly affirmed 
in the famous Declaration, ground to powder beneath this iron heel. 
No men ever worked harder in discharging an enormous mass of 
business of every kind than did the members of the Committee of 
Public Safety. Hour after hour, around a green table, they listened 
to reports, framed decrees, appointed officials. Sometimes over- 
come with weariness they threw themselves on mattresses spread 
upon the floor of their committee room, snatched two or three hours 
of sleep, then roused themselves to the racking work again. 
Under them was the Committee of General Security, whose mittee of' 
business was really police duty, maintaining, order throughout General 
the country, throwing multitudes of suspected persons into 
prison, whence they emerged only to encounter another redoubtable 
organ of this government, the Revolutionary Tribunal. 

This Tribunal had been created at Dan ton's suggestion. It was an 
extraordinary criminal court, instituted for the purpose of trying trai- 
tors and conspirators rapidly. No appeal could be taken .^j^^ ^^ 
from its decisions. Its sentences were always sentences of lutionary 
death. Later, when Robespierre dominated the Committee '^"^"'^^^ 
of Public Safety, the number of judges was increased and thej^ were 
divided into four sections, all holding sessions at the same time. 
Appointed by the Committee, the Revolutionary Tribunal servilely 
carried out its orders. It acted with a rapidity that made a cruel 
farce of justice. A man might be informed at ten o'clock that he was 



i86 THE CONVENTION 

to appear before the Revolutionary Tribunal at eleven. By two 
o'clock he was sentenced, by four he was executed. 

The Committee of Public Safety had another organ — the Repre- 
sentatives on Mission. These were members of the Convention sent, 
two to each department, and two to each army, to see that the 
tives on will of the Convention was carried out. Their powers were 

Mission practically unlimited. They could not themselves pronounce 

the sentence of death, but a word from them was sufficient to send 
to the Revolutionary Tribunal any one who incurred their suspicion 
or displeasure. 

There were other parts of this governmental machinery, wheels 

within wheels, revolutionary clubs, affiliated with the Jacobin Club in 

Paris, revolutionary committees of surveillance. Through them the 

y will of the great Committee of Public Safety penetrated to the tiniest 

■^- ,ji hamlet, to the remotest corner of the land. The Republic was held 

'■^T,.- tight in this closely woven mesh. 

I |/ This machinery was created to meet a national need, of the most 

/" ^ pressing character. The country was in danger, in direst danger, of 

submersion under a flood of invasion ; also in danger of disruption 

from within. The authors of this system were originally men who 

appreciated the critical situation, who grasped facts as they were, 

who were resolute to put down every foreign and domestic 

this^go^T °»j^ enemy, and who thrilled the people with their appeals to 



emmentai J5^ bQm^filgsg self-sacnficmg patriotism. Had this machinery 

machinery ^^ , ■ , i r i • i i ■ ■ 

been used m the way and for the purpose intended, it is not 
likely that it would have acquired the dismal, repellent reputation 
with posterity which it has enjoyed. France would have willingly 
endured and sanctioned a direct and strong government,, ruthlessly 
subordinating personal happiness and even personal security to the 
needs of national welfare. No cause could be higher, and none makes 
a wider or surer appeal to men. But the system was not restricted 
to this end. It was applied to satisfy personal and part)^ intrigues 
and spites, it was used to further the ambitions of individuals, it was 
crassly distorted and debased. The system did not spring full blown 
from the mind of any man or any group. It grew piece b/ piece, 
now this item being added, now that. Those who fashioned it be- 
A system lieved that only by appealing to or arousing one of the emo- 
basedonfear tions of men, fear, could the government get their complete 
and energetic support. The success of the Revolution could not be 




REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT 



187 



assured simply by love or admiration of its principles and its deeds 
— that was proved by events, the difficulties had only increased. 
There were too many persons who hated the Revolution. But even 
these had an emotion that could be touched, the sense of fear, horror, 
dread. That, too, is a powerful incentive to action. "Let terror 
be the order of the day," such was the official philosophy of the 
creators of this government, and it has given their system its name. 




^"^Ci 



i) 



The Guillotine 
After a contemporary drawing. 

Punish disloyalty swiftly and pitilessly and you create loyalty, if 
not from love, at least from fear, which will prove a passable 
substitute. 

The Committee of Public Safety and the Convention lost no time in 
striking a fast pace. To meet the needs of the war a general call for 
troops was issued. Seven hundred and fifty thousand men Great citizen 
were secured. "What we need is audacity, and more audacity, armies raised 
and always audacity" was a phrase epitomizing this aspect of history, 
a phrase thrown out by Danton, a man who knew how to sound the 
bugle call, knew how to mint the passion of the hour in striking form 



..-^yV 



i88 THE CONVENTION 

and give it the impress of his dynamic personahty. Carnot, one 
of the members of the Committee of Pubhc Safety, performed hercu- 
lean feats in getting this enormous mass of men equipped, disciplined, 
and officered. A dozen armies were the result and they were hurled 
in every direction at the enemies of France. Representatives of the 
Convention accompanied each general, demanding victory of him 
or letting him know that his head would fall if victory were not forth- 
coming. Some failed, even under this terrific incentive, this literal 
choice between victory or death, and they went to the scaffold. It 
was an inhuman punishment but it had tremendous effects, inspiring 
desperate energy. The armies made superhuman efforts and were 
wonderfully successful. A group of fearless, reckless, and thoroughly 
competent commanders emerged rapidly from the ranks. We shall 
shortly observe the reaction of these triumphant campaigns upon the 
domestic political situation. 

While this terrific effort to hurl back the invaders of France was 
going on, the Committee of Public Safety was engaged in a lynx- 
The law of eyed, comprehensive campaign at home against all domestic 
"suspects" enemies or persons accused of being such. By the famous 
law of "suspects," every one in France was brought within its iron 
grip. This law was so loosely and vaguely worded, it indicated so 
many classes of individuals, that under its provisions practically 
any one in France could be arrested and sent before the Revolutionary 
Tribunal. All were guilty of treason, and punishable with death, 
who "having done nothing against liberty have nevertheless done 
nothing for it." No guilty, and also no innocent, man could be sure 
of escaping so elastic a law, or, if arrested, could expect justice from 
a court which ignored the usual forms of law, which, ultimately, de- 
prived prisoners of the right to counsel, and which condemned them 
in batches. Yet the Declaration of the Rights of Man, which had 
seemed a new evangel to an optimistic world, had stated that hence- 
forth no one should be arrested or imprisoned except in cases de- 
termined by law and according to the forms of law. 

A tree is judged by its fruits. Consider the results in this case. In 
every city, town, and hamlet of France arrests of suspected persons 
were made en masse, and judgment and execution were rendered in 
almost the same summary and comprehensive fashion. Only a few 
instances can be selected from this calendar of crime. The city of 
Lyons had sprung to the defense of the Girondists after their expul- 



THE REIGN OF TERROR 189 

sion from the Convention on June 2. It took four months and a 
half and a considerable army to put down the opposition of this, the 
second city of France. When this was accomplished the Conven- 
tion passed a fierce decree: "The city of Lyons is to be de- 
stroyed. Every house which was inhabited by the rich shall treatment 
be demolished. There will remain only the homes of the °* Ly°°s . 
poor, of patriots, and buildings especially employed for industries, 
and those edifices dedicated to humanity and to education." The 
name of this famous city was to be obliterated. It was henceforth 
to be known as the Liberated City {Commune affranchie). This 
savage sentence was not carried out, demolition on so large a scale 
not being easy. Only a few buildings were blown to pieces. But 
over 3500 persons were arrested and nearly half of them were 
executed. The authorities began by shooting each one individually. 
The last were mowed down in batches by cannon or musketry fire. 
Similar scenes were enacted, though not on so extensive a scale, in 
Toulon (tb-16h') and Marseilles (mar-salz'). 

It was for the Vendee that the worst ferocities were reserved. 
The Vendee had been in rebellion against the Republic, and in the 
interest of counter-revolution. The people had been angered 
by the laws against the priests. Moreover the people of that punishment 
section refused to fight in the Republic's armies. It was en- 
tirely legitimate for the government to crush this rebellion but it did 
so only after an indescribably cruel war, in which neither side gave 
quarter. Carrier (kar-ya'), the representative on mission sent out 
by the Convention, established a gruesome record for barbarity. 
He did not adopt the method followed by the Revolutionary „. . 
Tribunal in Paris which at least pretended to try the accused barity of 
before sentencing them to death. This was too slow a process. ^"'^"^ 
Prisoners were shot in squads, nearly 2000 of them. Drowning 
was resorted to. Carrier's victims were bound, put in boats, and the 
boats then sunk in the river Loire. Women and children were among 
the number. Even the Committee of Public Safety was shocked at 
Carrier's fiendish ingenuity and demanded an explanation. He had 
the insolence to pretend that the drownings were accidental. "Is 
it my fault that the boats did not reach their destination?" he asked. 
The number of bodies in the river was so great that the water was 
poisoned and for that reason the city government of Nantes forbade 
the eating of fish. Carrier was later removed by the Committee, 



190 THE CONVENTION 

but was not further punished by it, though ultimately he found his 
way to the guillotine. 

Meanwhile at Paris the Revolutionary Tribunal was daily sending 
its victims to the guillotine, after trials which were travesties of jus- 
tice. Guillotines were erected in two of the public squares and 
tionary each day saw its executions. Week after week went by, and 

Tribunal head after head dropped into the insatiable basket. Many 

of the victims were emigres or non-juring priests who had come 
back to France, others were generals who had failed of the indispen- 
sable victory ^nd had been denounced as traitors. Others still were 
persons who had favored the Revolution at an earlier stage and had 
worked for it, but who had later been on the losing side in the fierce 
party contests which had rent the Convention. Nowadays political 
struggles lead to the overthrow of ministers. But in France, as in 
Renaissance Italy, they led to the death of the defeated party, or at 
least of its leaders. As the blood-madness grew in intensity, it was 
voted by the Convention, in order to speed up the murderous pace, 
that the Revolutionary Tribunal after hearing a case for three days 
might then decide it without further examination if it considered 
"its conscience sufficiently enlightened." 

The Girondists were conspicuous victims. Twenty-one of them 

were guillotined on October 31, 1793, among them Madame Roland, 

who went to the scaffold "fresh, calm, smiling," according to a friend 

who saw her go. She had regretted that she "had not been born a 

Spartan or a Roman," a superfluous regret, as was shown by 

The Gxecu- 

tion of the the manner of her death, "at only thirty-nine," words with 

Girondist which shc closcd the passionate Memoirs she wrote while in 

prison. Mounting the scaffold she caught sight of a statue of 

liberty. "O Liberty, how they've played with you !" she exclaimed. 

She had been preceded some days before by Marie Antoinette, the 

daughter of an empress, the wife of a king, child of fortune and of mis- 

The execu- fortune beyond compare. The Queen had been subjected 

tion of Mane xo an obsccnc trial, accused of indescribable vileness the 

Antoinette ... , t r t i > »- ^ 

iOctpber i6. Corruption of her son. If I have not answered," she cried, 
_^^^ " it is because nature herself rejects such a charge made against 

a mother: I appeal to all who are here." This woman's cry so 
moved the audience to sympathy that the officials cut the trial short, 
allowing the lawyers only fifteen minutes to finish. The Queen bore 
herself courageously. She did not flinch. She was brave to the end. 



EXECUTION OF MARIE ANTOINETTE 



191 



^^^H^^|y^«.,,i^a99[ 




...iJ**^ 








^^^^^^^^^^^HSLi MmjSx m^ ly 


^^^ 




- 


~ ^.^i 


Wff^'^^f3^ 




W^^^^^^ 


^ 


i 


1 ^ #-^ 


B 


i 


?|ii-_.K*i 


i^^F' ' ' ' '"Wim 


fc;*5^^^-, -%^ 


^Hf ""'^ip^ 




^B '9^ 






Ik "*** ^' yss^^f^^^s^iWil^^i-^ J 




1^ 


^■S'^m 


ji J %&^^^j^ 


^ 


5%w..J 


^' T • |PS 


W V" ! ' "Wjfea 


l^'^^'Wi^L^— . 


Hi 


"^S 


:9M|^^^g 


■mMs^^^^i 



hi a> 






192 THE CONVENTION 

Marie Antoinette has never ceased to command the sympathy of 
posterity, as her tragic stor}^ and the fall to which her errors partly 
led and the proud and noble courage with which she met her mournful 
fate have never ceased to move its pity and respect. She stands in 
history as one of its most melancholy figures. 

Charlotte Corday, a Norman girl, who had stabbed the notorious 
Marat to death, thinking thus to free her country, paid the penalty 
with serenity and dignity. All through these months men witnessed 
The Reign ^ tragic procession up the scaffold's steps of those who were 
of Terror great by position or character or service or reputation : Bailly, 
celebrated as an astronomer and as the Mayor of Paris in the early 
Revolution; the Duke of Orleans, who had played a shameless 
part in the Revolution, having been demagogue enough to discard 
his name and call himself Philip Equality, and having infamously 
voted, as a member of the Convention, for the death of his cousin, 
Louis XVI ; Barnave (bar-nav'), next to Mirabeau one of the most 
brilliant leaders of the Constituent Assembly ; and so it went, daily 
executions in Paris and still others in the provinces. Some fleeing 
the terror that walked by day and night, caught at bay, committed 
suicide, like Condorcet, last of the philosophers, and gifted theorist 
of the Republic. Still others wandered through the countr3^side 
haggard, gaunt, and were finally shot down, as beasts of the field. 
Yet all this did not constitute "the Great Terror," as it was called. 
That came later. 

Thus far there was at least a semblance or pretense of punishing the 

enemies of the Republic, the enemies of France. But now these 

odious methods were to be used as means of destroying political and 

personal enemies. Politics assumed the character and risks of war. 

We have seen that since August lo, 1792, there were two powers in 

the state, the Commune, or Government of Paris, and the Convention, 

or Government of France, now directed by the Committee of 

mune versus Public Safety. These two had in the main cooperated thus 

the Conven- fg^j- overthrowing the monarchy, overthrowing the Giron- 

tion . ^ -^ ' * 

dists. But now dissension raised its head and harmony 
was no more. The Commune was in the control of the most violent 
party that the Revolution had developed. Its leaders were Hebert 
(a-bar') and Chaumette (sho-met'). Hebert conducted a journal, 
the Pere Duchesne, which was both obscene and profane and which 
was widely read in Paris by the lowest classes. Hebert and Chau- 



THE COMMUNE OF PARIS 193 

mette reigned in the City Hall, drew their strength from the rabble 
of the streets which they knew how to incite and hurl at their enemies. 
They were ultra-radicals, audacious, truculent. They constantly 
demanded new and redoubled applications of terror. For a while 
they dominated the Convention. Carrier, one of the Convention's 
representatives on mission, was really a tool of the Commune. 

A NEW CALENDAR 

It was the Commune which now forced the Convention to attempt 
the dechristianization of France. For this purpose a new calendar 
was desired, a calendar that should discard Sundays, saints' a republican 
days, religious festivals, and set up novel and entirely secular calendar 
divisions of time. Henceforth the month was to be divided not 
into weeks, but into decades or periods of ten days. Every tenth 
day was to be the rest day. The days of the months were changed 
to indicate natural phenomena, July becoming Thermidor, or period 
of heat ; April becoming Germinal, or budding time ; November 
becoming Brumaire, or period of fogs. Henceforth men were to date, 
not from the birth of Christ, but from the birth of Liberty. The 
Year One of Liberty began September 21, 1792. The world was 
young again. The day was divided into ten hours, not twenty-four, 
and the ten were subdivided and subdivided into smaller units. 
This calendar was made obligatory. But great was the havoc created 
by the new chronology. Parents were required to instruct their chil- 
dren in the new method of reckoning time. " But the parents had 
been brought up on the old system and experienced much difficulty 
in telling what time of day it was according to the new terminology. 
Watchmakers were driven to add another circle to the faces of their 
watches. One circle carried the familiar set of figures, the other 
carried the new. Thus was one difficulty partially conjured away. 
The new calendar lasted twelve years. It was frankly and inten- 
tionally anti-Christian. The Christian era was repudiated. 

More important was the attempt to improvise a new religion. 
Reason was henceforth to be worshiped, no longer the Christian 
God. A begirming was made in the campaign for dechristian- ^^^ . 
ization by removing the bells from the churches, " the Eternal's against " su- 
gewgaws," they were called, and by making cannon and coin p^""^*'*'*"* 
out of them. Death was declared to be "but an eternal sleep" — 



194 



THE CONVENTION 



thus Heaven, and Hell as well, was abolished. There was a demand 
that church spires be torn down "as by their domination over other 
buildings, they seem to violate the principle of equality," and many 
were consequently sacrificed. This sorry business reached its climax 
The Worship i^ the formal establishment by the Commune of Paris of the 
of Reason Worship of Reason. On November lo, 1793, the Cathedral of 
Notre Dame was converted into a "Temple of Reason." The cere- 
mony of that day has been 
famous for a century and its 
fame may last another. A 
dancer from the opera, wear- 
ing the three colors of the re- 
public, sat, as the Goddess of 
Reason, upon the Altar of 
Liberty, where formerly the 
Holy Virgin had been en- 
throned, and received the 
homage of her devotees. After 
this many other churches in 
Paris, and even in the prov- 
inces, were changed into Tem- 
ples of Reason. The sacred 
vessels used in Catholic serv- 
ices were burned or melted 
down. In some cases the 
stone saints that ornamented, 
or at least diversified, the 
fagades of churches, were 
thrown down and broken or 
burned. At Notre Dame in 
Paris they were boarded over, 
and thus preserved for a period when their contamination would not 
be feared or felt. Every tenth day services were held. They might 
take the form of philosophical or political discourses, or the form 
of popular banquets or balls. 

The proclamation of this Worship of Reason was the high-water 
mark in the fortunes of the Commune. The Convention had been 
compelled to yield, the Committee of Public Safety to acquiesce in 
conduct of which it did not approve. Robespierre was irritated, 







i 


1 


J 


^rr^. 


1 


■ 




|V ^ »• «^' 


^1 


K 




:M| .^ , 


fl 


W 




^^^^ ~-'5M^ J 


^1 


m- 




^*J# 


1 


Bi 


Hi ' 


\i 


1 


1 



Mi.LE. Maillard, " Goddess of 
Reason" 

After the painting by Garneray. ! 



FALL OF HEBERTISTS AND DANTONISTS 195 

partly because he had a reUgion of his own which he preferred and 
which he wished in time to bring forward and impose upon France, 
partly because as a member of the great Committee he re- j^ . 
sented the existence of a rival so powerful as the Commune, opposes the 
The Hebertists had shot their bolt. Robespierre now shot his. ^ ertists 
In a carefully prepared speech he declared that "Atheism is aristo- 
cratic. The idea of a Supreme Being who watches over oppressed 
innocence and who punishes triumphant crime, is thoroughly demo 
cratic." He furtively urged on all attacks upon the blasphemous 
Commune, as when Dan ton declared, "These anti-religious mas- 
querades in the Convention must cease." 

But Robespierre was the secret enemy of Danton as well, though for 
a very different reason. The Commune stood for the Terror in all its 
forms and demanded that it be maintained in all its vigor. On the 
other hand, Danton, Camille Desmoulins, and their friends, „ , 

, ^ , _ , . Robespierre 

ardent supporters of the Terror as long as it was necessary, opposes the 
believed tha4 now the need for it had passed and wished its ^^'^*°°*s*s 
rigor mitigated and the system gradually abandoned. The armies 
of the Republic were everywhere successful, the invaders had been 
driven back, and domestic insurrections had been stamped out. 
Sick at heart of bloodshed now that it was no longer required, the 
Dantonists began to recommend clemency to the Convention. 



THE OVERTHROW OF THE COMMUNE 

The Committee of Public Safety was opposed to both these factions, 
the Hebertists and the Dantonists, and Robespierre was at the center 
of an intrigue to ruin both. The description of the machinations 
and manoeuvres which went on in the Convention cannot be under- 
taken here. To make them clear would require much space. It 
must suffice to say that first the Committee directed all its powers 
against the Commune and dared on March 13, 1794, to order the 
arrest of Hebert and his friends. Eleven days later they were guil- 
lotined. The rivalry of the Commune was over. The Convention 
was supreme. But the Committee had no desire to bring the Terror to 
an end. Several of its members saw their own doom in any lessening of 
its severity. Looking out for their own heads, they therefore resolved 
to kill Danton, as the representative of the dangerous policy of mod- 
eration. This man who had personified as no one else had done the 



196 THE CONVENTION 

national temper in its crusade against the allied monarchs, who had 
been the very central pillar of the state in a terrible crisis, who, when 

The fate France was for a moment discouraged, had nerved her to new 

of Danton effort by the electrifying cry, "We must dare and dare again 
and dare without end," now fell a victim to the wretched and frenzied 
struggles of the politicians because, now that the danger was over, he 
advocated, with his vastly heightened prestige, a return to modera- 
tion and conciliation. Terror as a means of annihilating his country's 
enemies he approved. Terror as a means of oppressing his fellow- 
countrymen, the crisis once passed, he deplored and tried to stop. 
He failed. The wheel was tearing around too rapidly. He was 
one of the tempestuous victims of the Terror. When he pleaded 
for peace, for a cessation of sanguinary and ferocious partisan politics, 
his rivals turned venomously, murderously against him. Conscious 
of his patriotism he did not believe that they would dare to strike 
him. A friend entered his study as he was sitting before the fire in 
revery and told him that the Committee of Public Safety had ordered 
his arrest. "Well, then, what then?" said Danton. "You must 
resist." "That means the shedding of blood, and I am sick of it. 
I would rather be guillotined than guillotine," he replied. He was 
urged to fly. "Whither fly?" he answered. "You (^o not carry 
your country on the sole of your shoe," and he muttered, "They will 
not dare, they will not dare." 

But they did dare. The next day he was in prison. In prison he 
was heard to say, "A year ago I proposed the establishment of the 
Revolutionary Tribunal. I ask pardon for it, of God and man." 
And again, "I leave everything in frightful confusion; not one of 
them understands anything of government. Robespierre will follow 
me. I drag down Robespierre. One had better be a poor fisherman 
than meddle with the governing of men." On the scaffold he ex- 
claimed, " Danton, no weakness !" His last words were addressed to 
the executioner. ' ' Show my head to the people ; it is worth showing. ' ' 
The fall of Danton left Robespierre the most conspicuous person on 
the scene, the most influential member of the Convention and of the 

Robespierre Committee of Public Safety. He was master of the Jacobins. 

dictator fj^g Commune was filled with his friends, anxious to do his 

bidding. The Revolutionary Tribunal was controlled and operated 
by his followers. For nearly four months, from April 5 to July 27, 
he was practically dictator. 



MAXIMILIEN ROBESPIERRE 



197 



A very singular despot for a people like the French. His qualities 
were not those which have characterized the leaders or the masses of 
that nation. The most authoritative French historian of this period, 
Aulard, notes this fact. As a politician Robespierre was "astute, 
mysterious, undecipherable." "What we see of his soul is most 

repellent to our 
French instincts of 
frankness and loy- 
alty. Robespierre 
was a hypocrite and 
he erected hypocrisy 
into a system of 
government." 

He had begun as 
a small provincial 
lawyer. He fed upon 
Rousseau, and was 
the narrow and 
anaemic embodiment 
of Rousseau's ideas. 
He had made his 
reputation at the 
Jacobin Club, where 
he delivered character of 

speeches care- Robespierre 

fully retouched and 
finished, abounding 
in platitudes that 
pleased, entirely lack- 
ing in the fire, the 
dash, the stirring, im- 
promptu phrases of 
a Mirabeau or a Danton. His style was correct, mediocre, thin, 
formal, academic. "Virtue" was his stock in trade and he made 
virtue odious by his everlasting talk of it, by his smug assumption 
of moral superiority, approaching even the hazardous pretension to 
perfection. He was forever singing his own praises with a lamen- 
table lack of humor and of taste. " I have never bowed beneath the 
yoke of baseness and corruption," he said. He won the title of 
"The Incorruptible." 




Robespierre 
After a contemporary sketch attributed to Gerard. 



198 THE CONVENTION 

As a politician his policy had been to use up his enemies, and. every 
rival was an enemy, by suggesting vaguely but opportunely that they 
were impure, corrupt, immoral, and by setting the springs in motion 
that landed them on the scaffold. He had himself stepped softly, 
warily, past the ambushes that lay in wait for the careless or the 
impetuous. By such processes he had survived and was now the man 
of the hour, immensely popular with the masses, and feared by those 
who disliked him. How would he use his power, his opportunity ? 

He used it, not to bring peace to a sadly distracted country, not to 
heal the wounds, not to clinch the work of the Revolution, but to at- 
The " Reign tempt to force a great nation to enact into legislation the ideas 
of Virtue " of a highly sentimental philosopher, Rousseau. It was to be a 
Reign of Virtue. Robespierre's ambition was to make virtue tri- 
umphant, a laudable purpose, if the definition of virtue be satis- 
factory and the methods for bringing about her reign honorable and 
humane. But in this case they were not. 

Robespierre stands revealed, as he also stands condemned, by the 
two acts associated with his career as dictator, the proclamation of a 
new religion and the Law of Prairial, altering for the worse the already 
monstrous Revolutionary Tribunal. Robespierre had once said in 
public, "If God did not exist we should have to invent Him." 
ship of "the Fortunately for a man of such poverty of thought as he, he 
Supreme did not have to resort to invention but found God already 

invented by his idolized Rousseau. He devoted his atten- 
tion to getting the Convention to give official sanction to Rousseau's 
ideas concerning the Deity. The Convention at his instigation 
formally recognized "the existence of the Supreme Being and the 
Immortality of the Soul." On June 8, a festival was held in honor 
of the new religion, quite as famous, in its way, as the ceremonies 
connected with the inauguration, a few months before, of the Worship 
of Reason. It was a wondrous spectacle, staged by the master hand 
of the artist David. A vast amphitheater was erected in the gardens 
of the Tuileries. Thither marched the members of the Convention 
in solemn procession, carrying flowers and sheaves of grain, Robes- 
pierre at the head, for he was president that day and played the 
pontiff, a part which suited him. He set fire to colossal figures, 
symbolizing Atheism and Vice, and then floated forth upon a long 
rhapsody. "Here," he cried from the platform, "is the Universe 
assembled. O Nature, how sublime, how exquisite, thy power ! 



WORSHIP OF THE SUPREME BEING 



199 




200 



THE CONVENTION 




Card of Admission to the Festival of 
THE Supreme Being 



How tyrants will pale at the tidings of our feast!" A hundred 
thousand voices chanted a sacred hymn which had been composed for 
the occasion and for which they had been training for a week. Robes- 
Robespierre pierre stood the cynosure of all eyes, at the very summit of 
as pontiff ambition, receiving boundless admiration as he thus inaugu- 
rated the new worship of the Supreme Being, and breathed the 

intoxicating incense that 
arose. Profound was the 
irony of this scene, the in- 
credible culmination of a 
century of skepticism. Some 
ungodl}^ persons made merry 
over this mummery, indulg- 
ing in indiscreet gibes at 
"The Incorruptible's" ex- 
pense. The power of sar- 
casm was not yet dead in 
France, as this man who 
never smiled now learned. 
Two days later Robespierre caused a bill to be introduced into the 
Convention which showed that this delicate hand could brandish dag- 
gers as well as carry flowers and shocks of corn. The irreverent, the 
dangerous, must be swept like chaff into the burning pit. This 
The Law of bill, which became the Law of 22d Prairial, made the proce- 
dure of the Revolutionary Tribunal more murderous still. The 
accused were deprived of counsel. Witnesses need not be heard in 
cases where the prosecutor could adduce any material or "moral" 
proof. Any kind of opposition to the government was made punish- 
able with death. The question of guilt was left to the "enlightened 
conscience" of the jury. The jury was purged of all members who 
were supposed to be lukewarm toward Robespierre. The accused 
might be sent before this packed and servile court either by the Con- 
vention, or by the Committee of Public Safety, or by the Committee 
of General Security, or by the public prosecutor alone. In other 
words, any life in, France was at the mercy of this latter ofificial, 
Fouquier-Tinville, a tool of Robespierre. The members of the 
Convention itself were no safer than others, nor were the members of 
the great Committee, if they incurred the displeasure of the dictator. 
Now began what is called the Great Terror, as if to distinguish it 



Prairial 



THE FALL OF ROBESPIERRE 201 

from what had preceded. In the thirteen months which had preceded, 
the 22d of Prairial 1200 persons had been guillotined in Paris. In 
forty-nine days between that date and the fall of Robespierre, on the 
9th of Thermidor, 1376 were guillotined. On two days alone, 
namely the 7th and 8th of July, 150 persons were executed. Day 
after day the butchery went on. 

It brought about the fall of Robespierre. This hideous measure 
united his enemies, those who feared him because they stood for 
clemency, and those 'who feared him because, though Terrorists 
themselves, they knew that he had marked them for destruction. 
They could lose no more by opposing him than by acquiescing, and 
if they could overthrow him they would gain the safety of their heads. 
Thus in desperation and in terror was woven a conspiracy — not 
to end the Terror, but to end Robespierre. 

The storrn broke on July 27, 1794 (the 9th of Thermidor). When 
Robespierre attempted to speak in the Convention, which had 
cowered under him and at his demand had indelibly debased itself 
by passing the infamous Law of Prairial, he was shouted down. 
Cries of "Down with the tyrant!" were heard. Attempting to 
arouse the people in the galleries, he this time met with no response. 
The magic was gone. There was a confused, noisy struggle, xhe arrest of 
lasting several hours. Robespierre's voice failed him. " Dan- Robespierre 
ton's blood is choking him !" exclaimed one of the conspirators. 
Finally the Convention voted his arrest and that of his satellites, his 
brother, Saint-Just, and Couthon. 

All was not yet lost. The Revolutionary Tribunal was devoted to 
Robespierre and, if tried, there was an excellent chance that he would 
be acquitted. The Commune likewise was favorable to him. 1 1 took 
the initiative. It announced an insurrection. Its agents broke into 
his prison, released him, and bore him to the City Hall. Thereupon 
the Convention, hearing of this act of rebellion, declared him and his 
associates outlaws. No trial therefore was necessary. As soon as 
rearrested he would be guillotined. During the evening and early 
hours of the night a confused attempt to organize an attack against 
the Convention went on. But a little before midnight a drench- 
ing storm dispersed his thousands of supporters in the square, and execu- 
Moreover, Robespierre hesitated, lacked the spirit of decision *J°^ '^^ . 

. Robespierre 

and daring. The whole matter was ended by the Convention 
sending troops against the Commune. At two in the morning these 



202 THE CONVENTION 

troops seized the Hotel de Ville and arrested Robespierre and the 
leading members of the Commune. Robespierre had been wounded 
in the fray, his Jaw fractured by a bullet. 

He was borne to the Convention, which decHned to receive him. 
"The Convention unanimously refused to let him be brought into the 
sanctuary of the law which he had so long polluted," so ran the official 
report of this session. That day he and twenty others were sent to 
the guillotine. An enormous throng witnessed the scene and broke 
into wild acclaim. On the two following days eighty-three, more 
executions took place. 

France breathed more freely. The worst, evidently, was over. In 

the succeeding months the system of the Terror was gradually aban- 

^^ _,. doned. The various branches of the terrible machine of gov- 

The Ther- ° 

midorian emment were either destroyed or greatly altered. A milder 

reaction regime began. The storm did not subside at once, but it sub- 

sided steadily, though not without several violent shocks, several 
attempts on the part of the dwindling Jacobins to recover their 
former position by again letting loose the street mobs. The policy 
of the Convention came to be summed up in the cry " Death to the 
Terror and to Monarchy !" The Convention was now controlled by 
the moderates but it was unanimously republican. Signs that a 
monarchical party was reappearing, demanding the restoration of 
the Bourbons, but not of the Old Regime, prompted the Convention 
to counter-measures designed to strengthen and perpetuate the Re- 
public. 

THE THIRD CONSTITUTION, i795 

To accomplish this and thus prevent the relapse into monarchy, 
the Convention drew up a new constitution, the third in six years. 
Though the radicals of Paris demanded vociferously that the sus- 
pended Constitution of 1793 be now put into force, the Convention 
refused, finding it too "anarchical" a document. Instead, it framed 
the Constitution of 1 795 or of the Year Three. Universal suffrage was 
Its pro- abandoned, the motive being to reduce the political importance 

visions Qf the Parisian populace. Democracy, established on August 

10, 1792, was replaced by a suffrage based upon property. There 
was practically no protest. The example of the American states 
was quoted, none of which at that time admitted universal suffrage. 
The suffrage became practically what it had been under the monar- 



THE CONSTITUTION OF i795 203 

chical Constitution of 1791. The national legislature was hence- 
forth to consist of two chambers, not one, as had its predecessors. 
The example of America was again cited. "Nearly all the ^ legislature 
constitutions of these states," said one member, "our seniors of two 
in the cause of liberty, have divided the legislature into two *^ ^™ 
chambers ; and the result has been public tranquillity. " It was, how- 
ever, chiefly the experience which France had herself had with single- 
chambered legislatures during the last few years that caused her to 
abandon that form. One of the chambers was to be called the 
Council of Elders. This was to consist of 250 members, who must 
be at least forty years of age, and be either married or widowers. 
The other, the Council of the Five Hundred, was to consist of mem- 
bers of at least thirty years of age. This council alone was to have 
the right to propose laws, which could, however, not be put into force 
unless accepted by the Council of Elders. 

The executive power was to be exercised by a Directory, con- 
sisting of live persons, of at least forty years of age, elected by the 
Councils, one retiring each year. The example of America The 
was again recommended but was not followed because the Directory 
Convention feared that a single executive, a president, might re- 
mind the French too sharply of monarchy or might become a new 
Robespierre. 

The Constitution of 1795 was eminently the result of experience, 
not of abstract theorizing. It established a bourgeois re- ^^^ Republic 
public, as the Constitution of 1791 had established a bourgeois' no longer 
monarchy. The Republic was in the hands, therefore, of a ®™°"^ "^ 
privileged class, property being the privilege. 

But the Convention either did not wish or did not dare to trust the 
voters to elect whom they might desire to the new Councils. Was 
there not danger that they might elect monarchists and so hand over 
the new republican constitution to its enemies ? Would the members 
of the Convention, who enjoyed power, who did not wish to step 
down and out, and yet who knew that they were unpopular because of 
the record of the Convention, stand any chance of election to the 
new legislature? Yet the habit of power was agreeable to them. 
Would the Republic be safe ? Was it not their first duty to ,^^^ suppie- 
provide that it should not fall into hostile hands ? mentary 

Under the influence of such considerations the Convention 
passed two decrees, supplementary to the constitution, providing 



204 THE CONVENTION 

that two-thirds of each Council should be chosen from the present 
members of the Convention. 

The constitution was overwhelmingly approved by the voters to 

whom it was submitted for ratification. But the two decrees aroused 

decided opposition. They were represented as a barefaced 

The consti- ^^ 

tution ratified device whereby men who knew themselves unpopular could 

by the voters y^^^^ themselves in power for a while longer. Although the 

decrees were finally ratified, it was by much smaller majorities than 

had ratified the constitution. The vote of Paris was overwhelmingly 

against them. 

OPPOSITION TO THE DECREES 

Nor did Paris remain contented with casting a hostile vote. It 
proposed to prevent this consummation. An insurrection was 
Buona-Parte organized against the Convention, this time by the bourgeois 
and Murat a,nd wealthier people, in reality a royalist project. The Con- 
vention intrusted its defense to Barras (ba-ras') as commander-in- 
chief. Barras, who was more a politician than a general, called to his 
aid a little Corsican officer twenty-five years old who, two years 
before, had helped recover Toulon for the Republic. This little 
Buona-Parte, for this is the form in which the famous name appears 
in the official report of the day, was an artillery officer, a believer in 
the efficacy of that weapon. Hearing that there were forty cannon 
in a camp outside the city in danger of being seized by the insurgents, 
Bonaparte sent a young dare-devil cavalryman, Joachim Murat, 
to get them. Murat and his men dashed at full speed through the 
city, drove back the insurgents, seized the cannon and dragged them, 
always at full speed, to the Tuileries, which they reached by six o'clock 
in the morning. As one writer has said, "Neither the little general 
nor the superb cavalier dreamed that, in giving Barras cannon to be 
used against roj^alists, each was winning a crown for himself." 

The cannon were placed about the Tuileries, where sat the Conven- 
tion, rendering it impregnable. Every member of the Convention 
The insur- ^^^ given a rifle and cartridges. On the 13th of Vendemiaire 
rection of (Octobcr 5) ou camc the insurgents in two columns, down the 
dfi^Jire streets on both sides of the Seine. Suddenly at four-thirty 

(October 5, in the afternoon a violent cannonading was heard. It was 
^'^^ Bonaparte making his debut. The Convention was saved and 

an astounding career was begun. This is what Carlyle, in his 



THE END OF THE CONVENTION 205 

vivid way, calls "the whiff of grapeshot which ends what we spe- 
cifically call the French Revolution," an imaginative and inaccurate 
statement. Though it did not end the Revolution, it did, however, 
end one phase of it and inaugurate another. 



THE CONVENTION DISSOLVED 

Three weeks later, on October 26, 1795, the Convention declared 
itself dissolved. It had had an extraordinary history, only a few 
aspects of which have been described in this brief account, us record of 
In the three years of its existence it had displayed prodigious victories 
activity along many lines. Meeting in the midst of appalling 
national difficulties born of internal dissension and foreign war, 
attacked by sixty departments of France and by an astonishing 
array of foreign powers, England, Prussia, Austria, Piedmont, Hol- 
land, Spain, it had triumphed all along the line. Civil war had been 
stamped out ; and in the summer of 1795 three hostile states, Prussia, 
Holland, and Spain, made peace with France and withdrew from the 
war. France was actually in possession of the Austrian Netherlands 
and of the German provinces on the west bank of the Rhine. She 
had practically attained the so-called natural boundaries. War still 
continued with Austria and England. That problem was passed on 
to the Directory. 

During these three years the Convention had proclaimed the 
Republic in the classic land of monarchy, had voted two constitutions, 
had sanctioned two forms of worship, and had finally separated 
church and state, a thing of extreme difficulty in any Euro- vention and 
pean country. It had put a king to death, had organized **i^ ^^p^^Iic 
and endured a reign of tyranny, which long discredited the very idea 
of a republic among multitudes of the French, and which immeasur- 
ably weakened the Republic by cutting off so manj- men who, had they 
lived, would have been its natural and experienced defenders for a full 
generation longer, since most of them were young. The Republic used 
up its material recklessly, so that when the man arrived who wished 
to end it and establish his personal rule, this sallow Italian Buona- 
Parte, his task was comparatively easy, the opposition being leaderless 
or poorly led. On the other hand, the Republic had had its thrilling 
victories, its heroes, and its martyrs, whose careers and teachings were 
to be factors in the history of France for fully a century to come. 



2o6 THE CONVENTION 

The Convention had also worked mightily and achieved much in 
the avenues of peaceful development. It had given France a system 
Its peaceful of weights and measures, more perfect than the world had ever 
achievements seen, the metric system, since widely adopted by other coun- 
tries. It had laid the foundations and done the preliminary work for 
The metric a codification of the laws, an achievement which Napoleon 
system ^^s ^q Carry to completion and of which he was to monopolize 

the renown. It devoted fruitful attention to the problem of national 
education, believing with Danton, that "next to bread, education 
is the first need of the people," and that there ought to be a national 
system, free, compulsory, and entirely secular. The time has come, 
said the eloquent tribune, to establish the great principle which 
Popular appears to be ignored, "that children belong to the Republic 

education before they belong to their parents." A great system of pri- 
mary and secondary education was elaborated, but it was not put 
into actual operation, owing to the lack of funds. On the other hand, 
much was done for certain special schools. Among the invaluable 
creations of the Convention were certain institutions whose 
educational fame has Steadily increased, whose influence has been profound, 
Seated""^ the Normal School, the Polytechnic School, the Law and 
Medical Schools of Paris, the Conservatory of Arts and Crafts, 
the National Archives, the Museum of the Louvre, the National 
Library, and the Institute. While some of these had their roots in 
earlier institutions, all such were so reorganized and amplified and 
enriched as to make them practically new. To keep the balance of 
our judgment clear we should recall these imperishable services to 
civilization rendered by the same assembly which is more notorious 
because of its connection with the iniquitous Reign of Terror. The 
Republic had its glorious trophies, its honorable records, from which 
later times were to derive inspiration and instruction. 

REFERENCES 

The Establishment of the Republic : Aulard, The French Revolution, 
Vol. II, Chap. IV; Fisher, H. A. L., The Republican Tradition in Europe, Chap. 
IV; Stephens, History of the French Revolution, Vol. II, pp. 150-180; Mathews, 
The French Revolution, pp. 207-224. 

Trial and Execution of Louis XVI : Acton, Lectures on the French Revolu- 
tion, pp. 249-255 ; Carlyle, French Revolution, Vol. II, Book III, Chaps. VI- 
VIII (section entitled "Regicide"). 



REFERENCES 207 

The Reign of Terror : Mathews, pp. 224-251 ; Stephens, Vol. II, Chaps. 
X and XI; Gardiner, B. M., The French Revolution, pp. 156-187; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 338-371. 

Overthrow of Hebertists and Dantonists : Gardiner, pp. 188-204. 

Robespierre: Mathews, pp. 252-265; Morley, Miscellanies, Vol. I (essay 
on Robespierre); Gardiner, pp. 204-220; Acton, Chap. XIX. 

Reaction after the Overthrow of Robespierre : Mathews, pp. 266- 
285; Gardiner, pp. 221-253; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 372- 

397- t 

The Constitution of i 795 : Bourne, The Revolutionary Period in Europe, 
pp. 223-231 ; Aulard, Vol. Ill, Chap. VII. 



CHAPTER IX 
THE DIRECTORY 



prosecution 
of the war ' 



The Directory lasted from October 27, 1795, to November 19, 1799. 
^^ _. It took its name from the form of the executive branch of the 

The Direc- 
tory (179s- RepubUc, as determined by the Constitution of 1795. Its 

^'^'^ history of four years was 

troubled, uncertain, and ended in a 
violent overthrow. 

Its first and most pressing prob- 
lem was the continued prosecution 

^jjg of the war. As already stated, 

Prussia, Spain, and Holland 
had withdrawn from the coali- 
tion and had made peace with the 
Convention But England, Aus- 
tria, Piedmont, and the lesser 
German states were still in arms 
against the Republic. The first 
duty of the Directory was, there- 
fore, to continue the war with them 
and to defeat them. France had al- 
ready overrun the Austrian Nether- 
lands, that is, modern Belgium, 
and had declared them annexed to 

France. But to compel Austria, the owner, to recognize this 
annexation she must be beaten. The Directory, therefore, pro- 
ceeded with vigor to concentrate its attention upon this object. 
As France had thrown back her invaders, the fighting was no longer 
on French soil. She now became the invader, and that long series 
of conquests of various European countries by aggressive French 
armies began, which was to end only twenty years later with the fall 
of the greatest commander of modern times, if not of all history. 

208 




A Director in Official Costume 
Redrawn after a sketch by Le Dm. 



THE .FAMILY OF BONAPARTE 209 

The campaign against Austria, planned by the Directory, included 

two parallel and aggressive movements against that country — an 

attack through southern Germany, down the valley of the 

Danube, ending, it was hoped, at Vienna. This was the cam- The cam- 
paign against 
paign north of the Alps. South of the Alps, in northern Italy, Austria 

France had enemies in Piedmont or Sardinia and again in 

Austria, which had possession of the central and rich part of the Po 

valley, namely, Lombardy, with Milan as the capital. 

The campaign in Germany was confided to Jourdan (zhor-don') 

and Moreau (mo-ro') ; that in Italy to General Bonaparte, who made 

of it a stepping-stone to fame and power incomparable. 



EARLY LIFE OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE 

Napoleon Bonaparte was bom at Ajaccio (a-yat'-cho) in Corsica 
in 1769, a short time after the island had been sold by Genoa to 
France. The family was of Italian origin but had for two 
centuries and a half been resident in the island. His father, by descent 
Charles Bonaparte, was of the lesser nobility but was poor, ^ Corsican 
indolent, pleasure-loving, a lawyer by profession. His mother. Frenchman 
Laetitia Ramolino, was a woman of great beauty, of remark- ^ °^*'°°" 
able will, of extraordinary energy. Poorly educated, this 
"mother of kings" was never able to speak the French language 
without ridiculous mistakes. She had thirteen children, eight of 
whom lived to grow up, five boys and three girls. The father died 
when the youngest, Jerome, was only three months old. Napoleon, 
the second son, was educated in French military schools at Napoleon 
Brienne and Paris, as a sort of charity scholar. He was educated at 
very unhappy, surrounded as he was by boys who looked schooiTin 
down upon him because he was poor while they were rich, ^''^'^^e 
because his father was unimportant while theirs belonged to the 
noblest families in France, because he spoke French like the foreigner 
he was, Italian being his native tongue. In fact he was tormented in 
all the ways of which schoolboys are past-masters. He became sullen, 
taciturn, lived apart by himself, was unpopular with his fellows, 
whom, in turn, he despised, conscious, as he was, of powers quite 
equal to any of theirs, of a spirit quite as high. His boyish letters 
home were remarkably serious, lucid, intelligent. He was excellent 
in mathematics, and was fond of history and geography. At the 



210 



THE DIRECTORY 



" When I 
was a young 
lieutenant of 
artillery," 
later a favor- 
ite phrase 
with 
Napoleon 



age of sixteen he left the miUtary school and became a second lieu- 
tenant of artillery. One of his teachers described him at this time 
as follows : " Reserved and studious, he prefers study to amusement 
of any kind and enjoys reading the best authors ; is diligent in the 
study of the abstract sciences, caring little for anything else. He is 
taciturn and loves solitude, is capricious, haughty, and excessively 
self-centered. He talks little but is quick and energetic in his 
replies, prompt and incisive in 
repartee. He has great self- 
esteem, is ambitious, with 
aspirations that will stop at 
nothing. Is worthy of patron- 
age." 

Young Bonaparte read the 
intoxicating literature of re- 
volt of the eighteenth 
century, Voltaire, Tur- 
got, particularly Rous- 
seau. "Even when I 
had nothing to do," he 
said later, "I vaguely 
thought that I had no time to 
lose." As a young sub-lieu- 
tenant he had a wretchedly 
small salary. "I have no 
resources here but work," he 
wrote his mother. "I sleep 
very little. I go to bed at 
ten, I rise at four. I have only one meal a day, at three o'clock." 
He read history extensively, regarding it as "the torch of truth, 
the destroyer of prejudice." He tried his hand at writing essays, 
novels, but particularly a history of Corsica, for at this time his 
great ambition was to be the historian of his native land. He 
hated France and dreamed of a war of independence for Corsica. 
He spent much time in Corsica, securing long furloughs, which, 
moreover, he overstayed. As a consequence he finally lost his 
position in the army which, though poorly salaried, still gave him a 
living. He returned to Paris in 1792, hoping to regain it, but the 
disturbed state of affairs was not propitious. Without a profession, 




Charles Bonaparte 

After the painting by Belliard, engraved by 
Read. 



BONAPARTE DURING THE REVOLUTION 



without resources, he was almost penniless. He ate in cheap res- 
taurants. He pawned his watch — and, as an idle but interested 
spectator, he witnessed some of the famous "days" of the . 

' ' -'A spectator 

Revolution, the invasion of the Tuileries by the mob on the of the 
20th of June, when Louis XVI was forced to wear the bonnet /^^'°'"*'°° 
rouge, the attack of August lo when he was deposed, the September 
Massacres. Bonaparte's opinion was that the soldiers should have 

shot a few hundred, „ , 

' Renders use- 
then the crowd ful service to 

would have run. t^^ R«P"biic 
He was restored to his 
command in August, 
1792. In 1793 he dis- 
tinguished himself by 
helping recover Toulon 
for the Republic and in 
1795 by defending the 
Convention against the 
insurrection of Vendemi- 
aire, which was a lucky 
crisis for him. 

Having conquered a 
Parisian mob, he was 
himself conquered 

, T T Bonaparte 

by a woman. He marries 
fell madly in love Josephine 

Beauharnais 

With Josephine 
Beauharnais (bo-ar-na'), 
a widow six years older 
than himself, whose hus- 
band had been guillo- 
tined a few days before the fall of Robespierre, leaving her poor 
and with two children. Josephine did not lose her heart but she 
was impressed, indeed half terrified, by the vehemence of Napoleon's 
passion, the intensity of his glance, and she yielded to his rapid, 
impetuous courtship, with a troubled but vivid sense that the 
future had great things in store for him. "Do they" (the Direc- 
tors) "think that I need their protection in order to rise?" he 
had exclaimed to her. "They will be glad enough some day if 




Laetitia Ramolixo, Napoleon's Mother 
From a painting in the Town Hall at Ajaccio. 



212 THE DIRECTORY 

I grant them mine. My sword is at my side and with it I can go 
far." "This preposterous assurance," wrote Josephine, "affects me 




The House at Ajaccio in which Napoleon Was Born 
From a drawing by F. Clementson. 



to such a degree that I can believe everything may be possible 
to this man, and, with his imagination, who can tell what he may 
be tempted to undertake?" 



BONAPARTE'S OPPORTUNITY 213 

BONAPARTE'S CAMPAIGN IN ITALY 

Two days before they were married Bonaparte was appointed to 

the command of the Army of Italy. His sword was at his side. He 

now unsheathed it and made some memorable passes. Two 

days after the marriage he left his bride in Paris and started comm^/er 

for the front, in a mingled mood of desperation at the separa- °^ *^^^ ^""^y 

1^1", , • ■ , , °i Italy 

tion and of exultation that now his opportunity had come. 

Sending back passionate love-letters from every station, his spirit 
and his senses all on fire, feeling that he was on the very verge of 
achievement, he hastened on to meet the enemy and, as was quickly 
evident, "to tear the very heart out of glory." The wildness of 
Corsica, his native land, was in his blood, the land of fighters, a true son 
the land of the vendetta, of concentrated passion, of lawless °* Corsica 
energy, of bravery bej^ond compare, concerning which Rousseau had 
written in happy prescience twenty years before, "I have a presenti- 
ment that this little island will some day astonish Europe." That 
day had come. The young eagle it had nourished was now preening 
for his flight, prepared to astonish the universe. 

The diflficulties that confronted Bonaparte were numerous and no- 
table. One was his youth and another was that he was unknown. 
The Army of Italy had been in the field three years. Its generals 
did not know their new commander. Some of them were older than 
he and had already made names for themselves. They resented this 
appointment of a junior, a man whose chief exploit had been a street 
fight in Paris. Nevertheless when this slender, round-shouldered, 
small, and sickly-looking young man appeared they saw instantly 
that they had a master. He was imperious, laconic, reserved with 
them. "It was necessary," hesaid afterward, " in order to com- ^^^^^^^^^^^ 
mand men so much older than myself." He was only five feet and his 
two inches tall but, said Massena, "when he put on his gen- s^°^''^'^ 
eral's hat he seemed to have grown two feet. He questioned 
us on the position of our divisions, on the spirit and effective 
force of each corps, prescribed the course we were to follow, an- 
nounced that he would hold an inspection on the morrow, and 
on the day following attack the enemy." Augereau, a vulgar 
and famous old soldier, full of strange oaths and proud of his tall 
figure, was abusive, derisive, mutinous. He was admitted to the 
General's presence and passed an uneasy moment. "He frightened 



214 THE DIRECTORY 

me," said Augereau, "his first glance crushed me. I cannot under- 
stand it." 

It did not take these officers long to see that the young general 
meant business and that he knew very thoroughly the art of war. 
His speech was rapid, brief, incisive. He gave his orders succinctly 
and clearly and he let it be known that obedience was the order of 
the day. The cold reception quickly became enthusiastic cooperation . 

Bonaparte won ascendancy over the soldiers with the same light- 
ning rapidity. They had been long inactive, idling through meaning- 

„ . less manoeuvres. He announced immediate action. The re- 

Bonaparte 

and the sponse was instantaneous. He inspired confidence and he 

so lers inspired enthusiasm. He took an army that was discouraged, 

that was in rags, even the officers being almost without shoes, an 
army on half rations. He issued a bulletin which imparted to them 
his own exaltation, his belief that the limits of the possible could 
easily be transcended, that it was all a matter of will. He got into 
their blood and they tingled with impatience and with hope. "There 
was so much of the future in him," is the way Marmont described the 
impression. "Soldiers," so ran this bulletin, "soldiers, you are 
Bonaparte's i^l-fcd and almost naked ; the government owes you much, it 
bulletins to can give you nothing. Your patience, the courage which you 
^ ^^^^ exhibit in the midst of these crags, are worthy of all admira- 
tion; but they bring you no atom of glory; not a ray is reflected 
upon you. I will conduct you into the most fertile plains in the 
world. Rich provinces, great cities will be in your power; there 
you will find honor, glory, and wealth. Soldiers of Italy, can it be 
that you will be lacking in courage or perseverance?" 

Ardent images of a very mundane and material kind rose up before 
him and he saw to it that his soldiers shared them. By portraying 
very earthly visions of felicity Mahomet, centuries before, had 
stirred the Oriental zeal of his followers to marvelous effort and 
achievement. Bonaparte took suggestions from Mahomet on more 
than one occasion in his life. 

Bonaparte's first Italian campaign has remained in the eyes of mili- 
tary men ever since a masterpiece, a classic example of the art of war. 
Bonaparte's ^^ lasted a year, from April, 1796, to April, 1797. It may be 
first Italian Summarized in the 'words, "He came, he saw, he conquered." 
campaign y^^ confronted an allied Sardinian and Austrian army, and 
his forces were much inferior in number. His policy was therefore 



BONAPARTE IN ITALY 215 

to see that his enemies did not unite, and then to beat each in turn. 
His enemies combined had 70,000 men. He had about half that 
number. SHpping in between the Austrians and Sardinians he de- 
feated the former, notably at Dego, and drove them eastward. Then 
he turned westward against the Sardinians, defeated them at Mon- 
dovi and opened the way to Turin, their capital. The Sardinians sued 
for peace and agreed that France should have the provinces Bonaparte 
of Savoy and Nice. One enemy had thus been eliminated by forces the 

,.,. ,. .,, Sardinians to 

the rag heroes, now turned mto wmged victories. Bona- sue for peace 

parte summarized these achievements in a bulletin to his men, ^^^y- ^'96) 

which set them vibrating. "Soldiers," he said, "in fifteen days 

you have won six victories, taken twenty-one stands of colors, 

fifty-five pieces of cannon, and several fortresses, and conquered the 

richest part of Piedmont. You have taken 1500 prisoners and 

killed or wounded 10,000 men. . . . But, soldiers, you have done 

nothing, since there remains something for you to do. You have still 

battles to fight, towns to take, rivers to cross." 

Bonaparte now turned his entire attention to the Austrians, who 

were in control of Lombardy. Rushing down the southern bank of 

the Po, he crossed it at Piacenza (pe-a-chen'-zii). Beaulieu (bo-le-e), 

the Austrian commander, withdrew beyond the Adda River. „. 

' -^ The cam- 

There was no way to get at him but to cross the river by the paign against 

bridge of Lodi, a bridge 350 feet long and swept on the other ^^^ ustnans 
side by cannon. To cross it in the face of a raking fire was necessary 
but was well-nigh impossible. Bonaparte ordered his grenadiers 
forward. Halfway over they were mowed down by the Austrian fire 
and began to recoil. Bonaparte and other generals rushed to the 
head of the columns, risked their lives, inspired their men, and the 
result was that they got across in the very teeth of the murder- xhe bridge 
ous fire and seized the Austrian batteries. "Of all the actions °^ ^'^^'^ 
in which the soldiers under my command have been engaged," 
reported Bonaparte to the Directory, "none has equaled the tre- 
mendous passage of the bridge of Lodi." 

From that day Bonaparte was the idol of his soldiers. He had 
shown reckless courage, contempt of death. Thenceforth they called 
him affectionately "The Little Corporal." The Austrians xhe struggle 
retreated to the farther side of the Mincio and to the mighty **"■ Mantua 
fortress of Mantua. On May 16 Bonaparte made a triumphal entry 
into Milan. He sent a force to begin the siege of Mantua. That 




M >> 



S? -"" 



THE BATTLE OF ARCOLA 217 

was the key to the situation. He could not advance into the Alps 
and against Vienna until he had taken it. On the other hand, if 
Austria lost Mantua, she would lose her hold upon Italy. 

Four times during the next eight months, from June, 1796, to Jan- 
uary, 1797, Austria sent down armies from the Alps in the attempt to 
relieve the beleaguered fortress. Each time they were de- _ , , 

. , , Bonaparte s 

feated by the prodigious activity, the precision of aim, of the methods of 
French general, who continued his policy of attacking his ^^"^ ^^^ 
enemy piecemeal, before their divisions could unite. By this policy 
his inferior forces, for his numbers were inferior to the total of the 
opposed army, were always as a matter of fact so applied as to be 
superior to the enemy on the battlefield, for he attacked when the 
enemy was divided. It was youth against age, Bonaparte being 
twenty-seven, Wurmser and the other Austrian generals almost 
seventy. It was new methods against old, originality against the 
spirit of routine. The Austrians came down from the Alpine passes 
in two 'divisions. Here was Bonaparte's chance, and wonderfully 
did he use it. " In war," said Moreau to him two years later, " the 
greater number always beat the lesser." "You are right," replied 
Bonaparte. "Whenever, with smaller forces, I was in the presence 
of a great army, arranging mine rapidly, I fell like a thunderbolt 
upon one of its wings, tumbled it over, profited by the disorder which 
always ensued to attack the enemy elsewhere, always with my entire 
force. Thus I defeated him in detail and victory was always the 
triumph of the larger number over the smaller." All this was 
accomplished only by forced marches. "It is our legs that win his 
battles," said his soldiers. He shot his troops back and forth like a 
shuttle. By the rapidity of his movements he made up for his 
numerical weakness. Of course this success was rendered possible 
by the mistake of his opponents in dividing their forces when they 
should have kept them united. 

Even thus, with his own ability and the mistakes of his enemies 
cooperating, the contest was severe, the outcome at times trembled 
in the balance. Thus at Areola, the battle raged for three 

1 1 r ^"® battle 

days. Again, as at Lodi, success depended upon the control of of Areola 
a bridge. Only a few miles separated the two Austrian divi- ^^°^^^^^''^^^ 
sions. If the Austrians could hold the bridge, then their 
junction would probably be completed. Bonaparte seized a flag and 
rushed upon the bridge, accompanied by his staff. The Austrians 



2i8 THE DIRECTORY 

leveled a murderous fire at them. The columns fell back, several 
officers having been shot down. They refused to desert their general 
but dragged him with them by his arms and clothes. He fell into a 
morass and began to sink. "Forward to save the General !" was 
the cry and immediately the French fury broke loose, they drove back 
the Austrians and rescued their hero. He had, however, not repeated 
the exploit of Lodi. He had not crossed the bridge. But the next 
day his army was victorious and the Austrians retreated once more. 
The three days' battle was over (November 15-17, 1796). 

Two months later a new Austrian army came down from the Alps 
for the relief of Mantua and another desperate battle occurred, at 
Rivoli. On January 13-14, 1797, Bonaparte inflicted a crush- 
Jf^Rivoif^ ing defeat upon the Austrians, routed them, and sent them 
(January 13- spinning back into the Alps again. Two weeks later Mantua 
^^' ^^'^ surrendered. Bonaparte now marched up into the Alps, 

constantly outgeneraling his brilliant new opponent, the young Arch- 
duke Charles, forcing him steadily back. When on April 7 he reached 
Austria asks the little town of Leoben, about 100 miles from Vienna, 
for peace. Austria sued for peace. A memorable and crowded year 
o/i-eoben, of effort was thus brought to a brilliant close. In its twelve 
April, 1797 months' march across northern Italy the French had fought 
eighteen big battles, and sixty-five smaller ones. "You have, besides 
that," said Bonaparte in a bulletin to the army, "sent 30,000,000 
francs from the public treasury to Paris. You have enriched the 
Museum of Paris with 300 masterpieces of ancient and modern 
Italy, which it has taken thirty ages to produce. You have con- 
quered the most beautiful country of Europe. The French colors 
float for the first time upon the borders of the Adriatic." In another 
proclamation he told them they were forever covered with glory, that 
when they had completed their task and returned to their homes their 
fellow-citizens, when pointing to them, would say, "He was of the 
A,rmy of Italy." 

Thus rose his star to full meridian splendor. No wonder he 
believed in it. 

All through this Italian campaign Bonaparte acted as if he were 
the head of the state, not its servant. He sometimes followed 

Bonaparte ... , . ^ 

and the the advice of the Directors, more often he ignored it, fre- 

Directory quently he acted in defiance of it. Military matters did not 

alone occupy his attention. He tried his hand at political manipu- 



BONAPARTE CONQUERS VENICE 219 

lation, with the same confidence and the same success which he had 
shown on the field of battle. He became a creator and a destroyer of 
states. Italy was not at that time a united country but was a col- 
lection of small independent states. None of these escaped the 
transforming touch of the young conqueror. He changed the old 
aristocratic Republic of Genoa into the Ligurian Republic, giving 
it a constitution similar to that of France. He forced doubtful 
princes, like the Dukes of Parma and Modena, to submission and 
heavy payments. He forced the Pope to a similar humiliation, 
taking some of his states, sparing most of them, and levying exactions. 

His most notorious act, next to the conquest of the sue- Bonaparte 
cessive Austrian armies, was the overthrow, on a flimsy pre- conquers" 
text and with diabolic guile, of the famous old Republic of Venice (1797) 
Venice. 

"Once did she hold the gorgeous East in fee; 

And was the safeguard of the West : the worth 

Of Venice did not fall below her birth, 

Venice, the Eldest Child of Liberty." 

Such was the thought that came to the poet Wordsworth as he con- 
templated this outrage, resembling in abysmal immorality the con- 
temporary partition of Poland at the hands of the monarchs of 
Prussia, Austria, and Russia. At least this clear, bright, pagan 
republican general could have claimed, had he cared to, that he was 
no worse than the kings of the eighteenth century who asserted that 
their rule was ordained of God. Bonaparte was no worse ; he was 
also no better ; he was, moreover, far more able. He conquered 
Venice, one of the oldest and proudest states in Europe, and held 
it as a pawn in the game of diplomacy, to which he turned with 
eagerness and talent, now that the war was over. 

Austria had agreed in April, 1797, to the preliminary peace of Leo- 
ben. The following summer was devoted to the making of the final 
peace, that of Campo Formio, concluded October 17, 1797. During 
these months Bonaparte lived in state in the splendid villa of Monte- 
bello, near Milan, basking in the dazzling sunshine of his sudden and 
amazing fortune. There he kept a veritable court, receiving 
ambassadors, talking intimately with artists and men of letters, Bonaparte 
surrounded by young officers, who had caught the swift con- and his 

court 

tagion of his personality and who were advancing with his 
advance to prosperity and renown. There, too, at Montebello, 



220 



THE DIRECTORY 




Napoleon at Arcola 
After the painting by Gros. 



BONAPARTE AS DIPLOMAT 221 

were Josephine and the brothers and the sisters of the j^oung victor 
and also his mother, who kept a level head in prosperity as she had 
in adversity — all irradiated with the new glamour of their changed 
position in life. The young man who a few years before had pawned 
his watch and had eaten six-cent dinners in cheap Parisian restaurants 
now dined in public in the old manner of French kings, allowing the 
curious to gaze upon him. A bodyguard of Polish lancers attended 
whenever he rode forth. 

His conversation dazzled by its ease and richness. It was quoted 
everywhere. Some of it was calculated to arouse concern in high 
quarters. "What I have done so far," he said, "is nothing. I „ 

^ ' 7 o Bonaparte s 

am but at the beginning of the career I am to run. Do you flights of 
imagine that I have triumphed in Italy in order to advance ^^^^ 
the lawyers of the Directory ? . . . Let the Director)^ attempt to 
deprive me of my command and they will see who is the master. 
The nation must have a head who is rendered illustrious by glory." 
Two years later he saw to it that she had such a head. 

The treaty of Campo Formio initiated the process of changing the 
map of Europe which was to be carried on bewilderingly in the 3'ears to 
come. Neither France, champion of the new principles of politics, 
nor Austria, champion of the old, differed in their methods. Both 
bargained and traded as best they could and the result was an The division 
agreement that contravened the principles of the French Revo- °^ ^^^ ^poUs 
lution, of the right of peoples to determine their own destinies, the 
principle of popular sovereignty. For the agreement simply regis- 
tered the arbitrament of the sword, was frankly based on force, and 
on nothing else. French domestic policy had been revolutionized. 
French foreign policy had remained stationary. 

By the Treaty of Campo Formio Austria relinquished her posses- 
sions in Belgium to France and abandoned to her the left bank of the 
Rhine, agreeing to bring about a congress of the German states The treaty of 
to effect this change. Austria also gave up her rights in Lom- Campo 

• 1 /^- 1- 11- Formio 

bardy and agreed to recognize the new Cisaplme Republic (October, 
which Bonaparte created out of Lombardy, the duchies of ^'^^^^ 
Parma and Modena, and out of parts of the Papal States and Venetia. 
In return for this the city, the islands, and most of the mainland of 
Venice, were handed over to Austria, as were also Dalmatia and Istria. 
Austria became an Adriatic power. The Adriatic ceased to be a 
Venetian lake. 



222 



THE DIRECTORY 




BONAPARTE AS ROBBER OF ART GALLERIES 223 

The French people were enthusiastic over the acquisition of Bel- 
gium and the left bank of the Rhine. They were disposed, however, 
to be indignant at the treatment of Venice, the rape of a repub- xhe wishes 
lie by a republic. But they were obliged to take the fly with °f the 
the ointment and to adapt themselves to the situation. Thus people not 
ended the famous Italian campaign, which was the stepping- nonsuited 
stone by which Napoleon Bonaparte started on his triumphal way. :: 

He had, moreover, not only conquered Italy. He had plundered 
her. One of the features of this campaign had been that it had been 
based upon the principle that it must pay for itself and yield a 
profit in addition, for the French treasury. Bonaparte de- plundered 
manded large contributions from the princes whom he con- ^^^ 
quered. The Duke of Modena had to pay ten million francs, the Re- 
public of Genoa fifteen, the Pope twenty. He levied heavily upon 
Milan. Not only did he make Italy support his army, but he sent 
large sums to the Directory, to meet the ever threatening deficit. 

Not only that, but he shamelessly and systematically robbed her 
of her works of art. This he made a regular feature of his career as 
conqueror. In this and later campaigns, whenever victorious, 
he had his agents ransack the galleries and select the pictures, her art 
which he then demanded as the prize of war, conduct which ^^®"®^ 
greatly embittered the victims but produced pleasurable feelings in 
France. The entry of the first art treasures into Paris created great 
excitement. Enormous cars bearing pictures and statues, carefully 
packed, but labeled on the outside, rolled through the streets to the 
accompaniment of martial music, the waving of flags, and shouts 
of popular approval: "The Transfiguration" by Raphael; "The • 
Christ" by Titian; the Apollo Belvedere, the Nine Muses, the 
Laocoon, the Venus de Medici. 

During his career Bonaparte enriched the Museum of the Louvre 
(lovr) with over a hundred and fifty paintings by Raphael, Rem- 
brandt, Rubens, Titian, and Van Dyck, to mention only a few of the 
greater names. After his fall years later many of these were returned 
to their former owners. Yet many remained. The famous bronze 
horses of Venice, of which the Venetians had robbed Constantinople 
centuries before, as Constantinople had long before that robbed 
Rome, were transported to Paris after the conquest of Venice in 1797, 
were transported back to Venice after the overthrow of Napoleon 
and were put in place again, there to remain for a full 100 years, until 



224 



THE DIRECTORY 




BONAPARTE'S RETURN TO PARIS 225 

the year 19 15, when they were removed once more, this time by the 
Venetians themselves, for purposes of safety against the dangers of 
the Austrian war of that year. 

After this swift revelation of genius in the Italian campaign the 
laureled hero returned to Paris, the cynosure of all eyes, the center of 
boundless curiosity. He knew, however, that the wav to „ 

..... ■' Bonaparte s 

keep curiosity alive is not to satisfy it, for, once satisfied, it return to 
turns to other objects. Believing that the Parisians, like the ^^"^ 
ancient Athenians, preferred to worship gods that were unknown, he 
discreetly kept in the background, affected simplicity of dress and 
demeanor, and won praises for his "modesty," quite ironically mis- 
placed. Modesty was not his forte. He was studying his future very 
carefully, was analyzing the situation very closely. He would have 
liked to enter the Directory. Once one of the five he could have 
pocketed the other four. But he was only twenty-eight and Directors 
must be at least forty years of age. He did not wish or intend to 
imitate Cincinnatus by returning with dignity to the plow. He was 
resolved to "keep his glory warm." Perceiving that, as he expressed 
it, "the pear was not yet ripe," he meditated, and the result of his 
meditations was a spectacular adventure. 

After the Peace of Campo Formio only one power remained at war 
with France, namely England. But England was most formidable — 
because of her wealth, because of her colonies, because of her „ , . 

' ' England 

navy. She had been the center of the coalition, the pay- still the 
mistress of the other enemies, the constant fornenter of trouble, ^^^'^y 
the patron of the Bourbons. "Our Government," said Napoleon 
at this time, "must destroy the English monarchy or it must expect 
itself to be destroyed by these active islanders. Let us concentrate 
our energies on the navy and annihilate England. That done, 
Europe is at our feet." The annihilation of England was to be the 
most constant subject of his thought during his entire career, baffling 
him at every stage, prompting him to gigantic efforts, ending in 
catastrophic failure eighteen years later at Waterloo, and in the 
forced repinings of St. Helena. 

BONAPARTE'S EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION 

The Directory now made Bonaparte commander of the Army of 
England, and he began his first experiment in the elusive art of de- 
stroying these "active islanders." Seeing that a direct invasion of 



226 THE DIRECTORY 

England was impossible, he sought out a vulnerable spot which should 
at the same time be accessible, and he hit upon Egypt. Not that 
Appointed Egypt was an English possession, for it was not. 1 1 belonged to 
commander ^-j^e Sultan of Turkey. But it was on the route to India ; and 
" Army of Bonaparte, like many of his contemporaries, considered that 
England " England drew her strength, not from English mines and factories, 
from English brains and- characters, but from the fabulous wealth of 
India. Once cut that nerve and the mighty colossus would reel and 
fall. England was not an island ; she was a world-empire. As such 
she stood in the way of all other would-be world-empires, then as 
later. The year 19 14 saw no new arguments put forth by her enemies 
in regard to England that were not freely uttered in 1797. Bona- 
parte denounced this "tyrant of the seas" quite in our latter-day 
style. If there must be tyranny, it was intolerable that it should be 
exercised by others. He now received the ready sanction of the 
Directors to his plan for the conquest of Egypt. Once conquered, 
Egypt would serve as a basis of operations for an expedition to India, 
which would come in time. The Directors were glad to get 
piansThe^ him SO far away from Paris, where his popularity was burden- 
conquest of some, was, indeed, a constant menace. The plan itself, also, 
Egypt , t- > < 

was quite in the traditions of the French foreign office. More- 
over the potent fascination of the Orient for all imaginative minds, 
as offering an inviting, mysterious field for vast and dazzling action, 
operated powerfully upon Bonaparte. What destinies might not be 
carved out of the gorgeous East, with its limitless horizons, its 
immeasurable, unutilized opportunities? The Orient had appealed 
to Alexander the Great with irresistible force as it now appealed to 
this imaginative young Corsican, every energy of whose rich and 
complex personality was now in high flood. "This little Europe 
has not enough to offer," he remarked one day to his school-boy friend, 
Bourrienne. "The Orient is the place to go to. All great reputa- 
tions have been made there." "I do not know what would have 
happened to me," he said later, "if I had not had the happy idea of 
going to Egypt." He was a child of the Mediterranean and as a 
boy had drunk in its legends and its poetry. As wildly imaginative 
as he was intensely practical, both imagination and cool calculation 
recommended the adventure. 

Once decided on, preparations were made with promptness and in 
utter secrecy. On May 19, 1798, Bonaparte set sail from Toulon 



THE EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION 227 

with a fleet of 400 slow-moving transports bearing an armj' of 38,000 
men. A brilliant corps of young generals accompanied him, Berthier, 
Murat, Desaix, Marmont, Lannes, Kleber, tried and tested in Italy 
the year before. He also took with him a traveling library in which 
Plutarc h's Lives and Xenophon's Anadasis and the Koran were a few of 
the significant contents. Fellow-voyagers, also, were over one hundred 




EGYPT AND S\TIIA 

Scale of Miles 



Beirut 
D&iascus 



distinguished scholars, scientists, artists, engineers, for this expedition 
was to be no mere military promenade, but was designed to widen the 
bounds of human knowledge by an elaborate study of the products 
and customs, the history and the art of that country, famous, yet 
little known. This, indeed, was destined to be the most permanent 
and valuable result of an expedition which laid the broad foundations 
of modern Egyptology in The Description of Egypt, a monumental 
work which presented to the world in sumptuous form the discoveries 
and investigations of this group of learned men. 



228 THE DIRECTORY 

The hazards were enormous. Admiral Nelson with a powerful 
English fleet was in the Mediterranean. The French managed to 
The seizure escape him. Stopping on the way to seize the important 
of Malta position of Malta and to forward the contents of its treasury 

to the Directors, Bonaparte reached his destination at the end of 
June and disembarked in safety. The nominal ruler of Egypt was 
the Sultan of Turkey, but the real rulers were the Mamelukes, a sort 
of feudal military caste. They constituted a splendid body of 
cavalrymen, but they were no match for the invaders, as they 
lacked infantry and artillery, and were, moreover, far inferior in 
numbers. 

Seizing Alexandria on July 2 the French army began the march to 
Cairo. The difficulties of the march were great, as no account had 
The march been taken, in the preparations, of the character of the climate 
to Cairo g^j^fj ^Y^Q countr3^ The soldiers wore the heavy uniforms in 

vogue in Europe. In the march across the blazing sands they experi- 
enced hunger, thirst, heat. Many perished from thirst, serious eye 
troubles were caused by the frightful glare, suicide was not infrequent. 
Finally, however, after nearly three weeks of this agony, the Pyramids 
The batti came in sight, just outside Cairo. There Bonaparte ad- 
of the ministered a smashing defeat to the Mamelukes, encourag- 

yrami s -^^ j^.^ soldicrs by one of his thrilling phrases, "Soldiers, from 
the summit of these pyramids forty centuries look down upon you." 
The Battle of the Pyramids, July 21, 1798, gave the French control 
of Cairo. The Mamelukes were dispersed. They had lost 2000 
men. Bonaparte had lost very few. 

But no sooner had the French conquered the country than they 

became prisoners in it. For, on August i, Nelson had surprised the 

French fleet as it was Wing in the harbor of Abukir Bay, east of Alex- 

n de- andria, and had captured or destroyed it. Only two battle- 

stroys the ships and a frigate managed to escape. This Battle of the 

renc eet ]\[jig^ g^g [^ ^gg Called, was One of the most decisive sea fights of 

this entire period. It was Bonaparte's first taste of British sea 

power. It was not his last. 

Bonaparte received the news of this terrible disaster, which cut him 
off from France and cooped him up in a hot and poor country, with 
superb composure. "Well ! we must remain in this land, and come 
forth great, as did the ancients. This is the hour when characters of a 
superior order should show themselves." And later he said that the 



THE SIECxE OF ACRE 229 

English "will perhaps compel us to do greater things than we in- 
tended." 

He had need of all his resources, material and moral. Hearing that 
the Sultan of Turkey had declared war upon him, he resolved, in 
January, 1799, to invade Syria, one of the Sultan's provinces, „ . 
wishing to restore or reaflfirm the confidence of his soldiers by sion of Syria 
fresh victories and thinking, perhaps, of a march on India or ^^''^^^ 
on Constantinople, taking "Europe in the rear," as he expressed 
it. If such was his hope, it was destined to disappointment. The 
crossing of the desert from Egypt into Syria was painful in the ex- 
treme, marked b}' the horrors of heat and thirst. The soldiers 
marched amid clouds of sand blown against them by a suffocating 
wind. They, however, seized the forts of Gaza and Jaffa, and de- 
stroyed a Turkish army at Mt. Tabor, near Nazareth, but were 
arrested at Acre, which they could not take by siege, because The siege 
it was on the seacoast and was aided by the British fleet, but °^ ^"^ 
which they partly took by storm, only to be forced finally to with- 
draw because of terrific losses. For two months the struggle for 
Acre went on. Plague broke. out, ammunition ran short, and Bona- 
parte was again beaten by sea power. He led his army back to 
Cairo in a memorable march, covering 300 miles in twenty-six days, 
over scorching sands and amidst appalling scenes of disaster and des- 
peration. He had sacrificed 5000 men, had accomplished nothing, 
and had been checked for the first time in his career. On reaching 
Cairo he had the effrontery to act as if he had been triumphant, and 
sent out lying bulletins, not caring to have the truth known. 

A few weeks later he did win a notable victory, this time at Abukir, 
against a Turkish army that had just disembarked. This he correctly 
described when he announced, "It is one of the finest I have „, „ ,,, , 

The Battle of 

ever witnessed. Of the army landed by the enemy not a Abukir (juiy 
man has escaped." Over 10,000 Turks lost their lives in this, ^^' '''^-' 
the last exploit of Bonaparte in Egypt. 

BONAPARTE RESOLVES TO RETURN TO FRANCE 

For now he resolved to return to France, to leave the whole adven- 
ture in other hands, seeing that it must inevitably fail, and to seek his 
fortune in fairer fields. He had heard news from France that made 
him anxious to return. A new coalition had been formed during 



230 THE DIRECTORY 

his absence, the French had been driven out of Italy, France itself 

was threatened with invasion. The Directory was discredited and 

g . unpopular because of its incompetence and blunders. Bona- 

situation in parte did not dare inform his soldiers, who had endured 

^^'^^^ so much, of his plan. He did not even dare to tell Kleber 

(kla-bar'), to whom he intrusted the command of the army by a 

letter which reached the latter too late for him to protest. He set 

sail secretly on the night of August 21, 1799, accompanied by Berthier 

(ber-tia'), Murat, and five other ofificers, and by two or three scientists. 

Kleber was later assassinated by a Mohammedan fanatic and the 

French army was forced to capitulate and evacuate Egypt, in August, 

1 801. That ended the Egyptian expedition. 

I.t was no easy thing to get back from Egypt to France with the 
English scouring the seas, and the winds against him. Sometimes 
The return the little sail-boat on which Bonaparte had taken passage was 
from Egypt beaten back ten miles a day. Then the wind would shift at 
night and progress would be made. It took three weeks of hugging 
the southern shore of the Mediterranean before the narrows between 
Africa and Sicily were reached. These were guarded by an English 
battleship. But the French slipped through at night, lights out. 
Reaching Corsica they stopped several daj's, the winds dead against 
them. It seemed as if every one on the island claimed relationship 
with their fellow-citizen who had been rendered "illustrious by 
glory." Bonaparte saw his native land for the last time in his life. 
Finally he sailed for France, and was nearly overhauled by the 
British, who chased him to almost within sight of land. The journey 
from the coast to Paris was a continuous ovation. The crowds were 
such that frequently the carriages could advance but slowly. Eve- 
nings there were illuminations everywhere. When Paris was reached, 
delirium broke forth. 

He arrived in the nick of time, as was his wont. Finally the pear 

was ripe. The government was in the last stages of unpopularity 

and discredit. Incompetent and corrupt, it was also unsuc- 

Ine unpop- ^ ' 

uiarity of the cessful. The Directory was in existence for four years, from 
Directory October, 1795, to November, 1799. Its career was agitated. 
The defects of the constitution, the perplexing circumstances of the 
times, the ambitions and intrigues of individuals seeking personal 
advantages and recking little of the state, had strained the institutions 
of the country almost to the breaking point, and had created a wide- 



BONAPARTE AS CONSPIRATOR 231 

spread feeling of weariness and disgust. Friction had been constant 
between the Directors and the legislature, and on two occasions the 
former had laid violent hands upon the latter, once arresting a group 
of royalist deputies and annulling their election, once doing the same 
to a group of radical republicans. They had thus made sport of the 
constitution and destroyed the rights of the voters. Their 
foreign policy, after Bonaparte had sailed for Egypt, had been so tion formed 
aggressive and blundering that a new coalition had been formed against 

■ r 1 1 A • 1 • France 

against France, consistmg of England, Austria, and Russia, 
which country now abandoned its eastern isolation and entered 
upon a period of active participation in the affairs of western Europe. 
The coalition was successful, the French were driven out of Germany 
back upon the Rhine, out of Italy, and the invasion of France was, 
perhaps, impending. The domestic policy of the Directors had also 
resulted in fanning once more the embers of religious war in Vendee. 
In these troubled waters Bonaparte began forthwith to fish. He 
established connections with a group of politicians who for one reason 
and another considered a revision of the constitution desirable 
and necessary. The leader of the group was Sieyes (se-a-yas'), Bonaparte 
a man who plumed himself in having a complete knowledge of ^'^ ^^^^ 
the art and theory of government and who now wished to 
endow France with the perfect institutions of which he carried the 
secret in his brain. Sieyes was a man of Olympian conceit, of oracular 
utterances, a coiner of telling phrases, enjoying an immoderate 
reputation as a constitution-maker. His phrase was now that to 
accomplish the desired change he needed "a sword." He would 
furnish the pen himself. The event was to prove, contrary to all 
proverbs, that the pen is weaker than the sword, at least when the 
latter belongs to a Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte, who really 
despised "this cunning priest," as he called him, was nevertheless 
quite willing to use him as a stepping-stone. Heaping flatteries 
upon him he said : "We have no government, because we have no 
constitution ; at least not the one we need. It is for your genius 
to give us one." 

PLOTTING A COUP D'ETAT 

The plan these and other conspirators worked out was to force the 
Directors to resign, willy-nilly, thus leaving France without an execu- 
tive, a situation that could not possibly be permitted to continue; 



232 



THE DIRECTORY 



then to get the Council of Elders and the Council of the Five Hundred 
to appoint a committee to revise the constitution. Naturally 
Sieyes and Bonaparte were to be on that committee, if all went well. 
Then let wisdom have her sway. The conspirators had two of the 
Directors on their side and a majority of the Elders, and fortunately 
the President of the Council of Five Hundred was a brother of 
Napoleon, Lucien Bonaparte, a shallow but cool-headed rhetorician, 
to whom the honors of the 

critical day were destined to Jm^ 

be due. 

Thus was plotted in the 
dark the coiip d'etat of Bru- 
What is a maire which landed 
coupdetat? Napoleon in the sad- 
dle, made him ruler of a 
great state and opened a new 
and prodigious chapter in the 
history of Europe. There is 
no English word for coup 
d'etat, as fortunately the 
thing described is alien to 
the history of English-speak- 
ing peoples. 1 1 is the seizure 
of the state, of power, by 
force and ruse, the over- 
throw of the form of govern- 
ment by violence, by arms. 
There had been coups d'etat 
before in France. There 
were to be others later, in 
the nineteenth century. But the coup d'etat of i8th and 19th Bru- 
maire (November 9 and 10, 1799) is the most classical example of this 
device, the most successful, the most momentous in its consequences. 
But how to set the artful scheme in motion ? There was the danger 
that the deputies of the Five Hundred might block the way, danger 
The risk the ^^ ^ popular insurrection in Paris, of the old familiar kind, if the 
conspirators rumor got abroad that the Republic was in peril. The conspira- 
^^°^ tors must step warily. They did so — and they nearly failed — 

and had they failed, their fate would have been that of Robespierre. 




Official Costume of a Member of the 
Council of the Five Hltndred 

From a water-color hv David. 



THE END OF THE DIRECTORY 233 

A charge was trumped up, for which no evidence was given, that a 
plot was being concocted against the RepubUc. Not an instant must 
be lost, if the state was to be saved. The Council of Elders, ^, , , 
mformed of this, and already won over to the conspiracy, i8th Bru- 
thereupon voted, upon the i8th of Brumaire, that both Councils ^^"^ 
should meet the following day at St. Cloud, several miles from Paris, 




LuciEN Bonaparte 
From the painting by R. Lefevre. 



and that General Bonaparte should take command of the troops for 
the purpose of protecting them. 

The next day, Sunday, the two Councils met in the palace of St. 
Cloud. Delay occurring in arranging the halls for the extraordinary 



234 THE DIRECTORY 

meeting, the suspicious legislators had time to confer, to concert 
opposition. The Elders, when their session finally began at two 

„ . o'clock, demanded details concerning the pretended plot. 

the Council Bonaparte entered and made a wild and incoherent speech, 
ers They were "standing on a volcano," he told them. He was 
no "Caesar," "Cromwell," intent upon destroying the liberties of 
his country. "General, you no longer know what you are saying " 
whispered Bourrienne, urging him to leave the chamber, which he 
immediately did. 

This was a bad beginning, but worse was yet to come. Bonaparte 
went to the Council of Five Hundred, accompanied by four grena- 

Bonaparte diers. He was greeted with a perfect storm of wrath. Cries of 

in the " Outlaw him, outlaw him ! " " Down with the Dictator, down 

Council of 

the Five With the tyrant !" rent the air. Pandemonium reigned. He 

Hundred received blows, was pushed and jostled, and was finally dragged 
fainting from the hall by the grenadiers, his coat torn, his face bleed- 
ing. Outside he mounted his horse in the courtyard, before the soldiers. 
It was Lucien who saved this badly bungled day. Refusing to 
put the motion to outlaw his brother, he left the chair, made his 
Lucien saves Way to the courtyard, mounted a horse, and harangued the 
the day soldicrs, telling them that a band of assassins was terrorizing 

the assembly, that his life and that of Napoleon were no longer safe, 
and demanding^ as President of the Five Hundred, that the soldiers 
enter the hall and clear out the brigands and free the Council. The 
soldiers hesitated. Then Lucien seized Napoleon's sword, pointed 
it at his brother's breast, and swore to kill him if he should ever 
lay violent hands on the Republic. The lie and the melodrama 
worked. The soldiers entered the hall, led by Murat. The legis- 
lators escaped through the windows. 

That evening groups of Elders and of the Five Hundred who fa- 
vored the conspirators met, voted the abolition of the Direc- 
U)ry over^ ^^^y* ^^'^ appointed three Consuls, Sieyes, Ducos, and General 
thrown, Bouapartc, to take their place. They then adjourned for 

io°T799*^'^ four months, appointing, as their final act, committees to 
cooperate with the Consuls in the preparation of a new con- 
stitution. 
Establish- ^he three Consuls promised "fidelity to the Republic, one 

nent of the and indivisible, to liberty, equality, and the representative 
system of government." At six o'clock on Monday morning 



BONAPARTE FIRST CONSUL 235 

every one went back to Paris. The grenadiers returned to their 
garrison singing revolutionar}- songs and thinking most sincerely that 
they had saved the Repubhc and the Revolution. No outbreak 
occurred in Paris. The coup d'etat was popular. Government bonds 
rose rapidly, nearly doubling in a week. 

Such was the Little Corporal's rise to civil power. It was fortu- 
nate, as we have seen, that not all the ability of his remarkable family 
was monopolized by himself. Lucien had his particular share, a 
distinct advantage to his kith and kin. 

REFERENCES 

Early Life of Napoleon Bonaparte : Fisher, Napoleon (Home University 
Library), pp. 7-28; Johnston, R. M., Napoleon, pp. 1-25; Fournier, Napoleon 
/, Chaps. I and II; Rose, J. H., Life of Napoleon I, Chaps. I-IV; Sloane, 
Napoleon Bonaparte, Vol. I, Chaps. Ill and V ; Robinson and Beard, Readings in 
Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 309-312. 

Bonaparte's First Italian Campaign: Fisher, pp. 28-56; Johnston, pp. 
27-47; Fournier, pp. 72-110; Rose, Vol. I, Chaps. V-VII; Sloane, Chaps. 
XXV-XX\T; Tarbell, Ida M., Napoleon's Addresses, Selections from the 
Prorlamations, Speeches, and Correspondence of Napoleon Bonaparte. 

The Egyptlan Expedition : Fisher, pp. 56-72 ; Fournier, Chap. VI ; Rose, 
Vol. I, Chaps. VIII and IX ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIIT, Chap. XIX. 

The Coup d'Etat of Brumaire : Johnston, pp. 59-79; Fournier, Chap. 
VIII; Rose, Vol. I, Chap. X ; Sloane, Vol. II, Chaps. X and XI; FySe, History 
of Modern Europe, pp. 135-144. 



CHAPTER X 



THE CONSULATE 



THE FORM AND PATTERN OF THE MAN 



Thus the famous young warrior had clutched at power and was not 
soon to let it slip. It had been a narrow escape. Fate had trembled 
dangerously in the balance on that gray November Sunday afternoon, 
but the gambler had 
won. His thin, sal- 
low face, his sharp, 
metallic voice, his 
abrupt, imperious 
gesture, his glance 
that cowed and ter- 
rified, his long dis- 
ordered hair, his deli- 
cate hands, became 
a part of the history 
of the times, mani- 
festing the intensely 
vivid impression 
which he had made 
upon his age and 
was to deepen. He 
was to etch the im- 
press of his amaz- 
ing personality with 
deep, precise, bold strokes upon the institutions and the life of France. 
He was, in reality, a flinty young despot with a pronounced taste 
His love for military glory. "I love power," he said later, "as a 

of power musician loves his violin. I love it as an artist, 

in a position to indulge his taste. 

236 




Bonaparte, First Consul 
From an engraving by Momal, after Isabey. 



He was now 



ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONSULATE 



Pending a wider and a higher flight, there were two tasks that 
called for the immediate attention of the three Consuls, who now 
took the place formerly occupied by the five Directors. A new 
constitution must be made, and the war against the coalition must be 
carried on. 

THE FOURTH CONSTITUTION (1799) 

The Constitution of the Year VHI (1799), the fourth since the 
beginning of the Revolution, hastily composed and put into force a 

month after the The making 

coup d'etat, was °^ the Con- 
stitution of 
m Its essentials the Year 

the work of Bona- '^"^ 
parte and was designed 
to place supreme power 
in his hands. This had 
not been at all the pur- 
pose of Sieyes or of the 
committees appointed 
to draft the document. 
But Sieyes's plan, which 
had not been carefully 
worked out but was con- 
fused and uncertain in 
many particulars, en- 
countered the abrupt 
disdain of Bonaparte. 
There was to be a Grand 
Elector with a palace at 
Versailles and an income 
of six million francs a 
year. This was the 
place evidently intended 




Josephine 
After a drawing by Isabey. 



for Bonaparte, who immediately killed it with the statement that 
he had no desire to be merely "a fatted pig." Impatient with this 
scheme and with others suggested by the committees. Bona- Bonaparte 
parte practically dictated the constitution, using, to be sure, the con^ti- 
such of the suggestions made by the others as seemed to him 
good or harmless. The result was the organization of that phase 



tution maker 



238 THE CONSULATE 

of the history of the Repubhc which is called the Consulate and 
which lasted from 1799 to 1804. 

The executive power was vested in three Consuls who were to be 

elected for ten years and to be reeligible. They were to be elected by 

the Senate but, to get the system started, the constitution 

Bonaparte • ^ ^ 

First indicated who they should be — Bonaparte, First Consul ; 

Consul Cambaceres (kon-ba-sa-ras'), the second, and Lebrun (le-brun'), 

the third. Practically all the powers were to be in the hands of the 
First Consul, the appointment of ministers, ambassadors, officers of 
the army and navy, and numberless civil officials, including judges, 
the right to make warand peace, and treaties, subject to the sanction 
of the legislature. 

The First Consul was also to have the initiative in all legislation. 

Bills were to be prepared by a Council of State, were then to be 

submitted to a body called the Tribunate, which was to have the 

The legisia- right to discuss them but not to vote them. Then they were 

tive power ^.o go to the Legislative Body, which was to have the power 

to vote them, but not discuss them. Moreover this "assembly of 

300 mutes" must discharge its single function of voting in secret. 

xjjg There was also to be a fourth body, higher than the others — 

Senate ^-j-jg Senate, which was to be the guardian of the constitution 

and was also to be an electing body, choosing the Consuls, the 

members of the Tribunate and the Legislative Body from certain 

lists, prepared in a cumbersome and elaborate way, and pretending 

to safeguard the right of the voters, for the suffrage was declared 

by the constitution to be universal. No time need be spent on this 

aspect of the constitution, for it was a sham and a deception. 

All this elaborate machinery was designed to keep up the fiction of 

the sovereignty of the people, the great assertion of the Revolution. 

The Republic continued to exist. The people were voters. 

Powers of ' z' ' . 

the First They had their various assemblies, thus ingeniously selected. 

Consul Practically, however, and this is the matter that most con- 

cerns us, popular sovereignty was gone ; Bonaparte was sovereign. 
He had more extensive executive powers than Louis X\T had had 
under the Constitution of 179 1. He really had the legislative power 
also. No bill could be discussed or voted that had not been first 
prepared by his orders. Once voted it could not go into force until 
he promulgated it. France was still a republic in name ; practically, 
however, it was a monarchy, scarcely veiled at that. Bonaparte's 



WAR WITH AUSTRIA 239 

position was quite as attractive as that of any monarch by divine 
right, except for the fact that he was to hold it for a term of ten years 
only and had no power to bequeath it to an heir. He was to remedy 
these details later. 

BONAPARTE'S CENTR.ALIZED SYSTEM 

Having given France a constitution, he secured the enactment of a 
law which placed all the local government in his hands. There was 
to be a prefect at the head of each department, a subprefect Bonaparte 
for each arrondissement, a mayor for every town or com- establishes a 

-^ -^ . centralized 

mune. The citizens lost the power to manage their own local administra- 
affairs, and thus their training in self-government came to an *'^^ system 
end.. Government, national and local, was centralized in Paris, more 
effectively, even, than in the good old days of the Bourbons and their 
intendants. 

Having set his house in order, having gained a firm grip on the reins 
of power, Bonaparte now turned his attention to the foreign enemies 
of France. The coalition consisted of England, Austria, and ^^^ against 
Russia. England was difficult to get at. The Russians the second 
were dissatisfied with their allies and were withdrawing from 
cooperation. There remained Austria, the enemy Bonaparte had 
met before. 

BONAPARTE'S SECOND ITALIAN CAMPAIGN, 1800 

One Austrian army was on the Rhine and Bonaparte sent Moreau 
to attack it. Another was in northern Italy and he went in person to 
attend to that. While he had been in Egypt the Austrians had 
won back northern Italy. Melas (ma'-las), their general, had 
driven Massena (ma-sa-nii') into Genoa, where the latter hung on like 
grim death, with rations that would soon be exhausted. Bonaparte's 
plan was to get in between the Austrians and their own country, to 
attack them in the rear, thus to force them to withdraw from the 
siege of Genoa, in order to keep open their line of communication. 
In the pursuit of this object he accomplished one of his most famous 
exploits, the crossing of the Great Saint Bernard Pass over The cross- 
the Alps, with an army of 40,000, through snow and ice, ^s&mt 
dragging their cannon in troughs made out of hollowed logs. Bernard Pass 
It was a matter of a week. Once in Italy he sought out the Austrians 



240 THE CONSULATE 

and met them unexpectedly at Marengo (June 14, 1800). The 
battle came near being a defeat, owing to the fact that Bonaparte 
blundered badly, having divided his forces, and that Desaix's (de-sa') 
division was miles away. The battle began at dawn and went 
disastrously for the French. At one o'clock the Austrian com- 
mander rode back to his headquarters, believing that he had won and 
that the remaining work could be left to his subordinates. The 
French were pushed back and their retreat threatened to become a 
stampede. The day was saved by the appearance of Desaix's 
division on the scene, at about five o'clock. The battle was resumed 
with fury, Desaix himself was killed, but the soldiers avenged his 
glorious death by a glorious victory. By seven o'clock the day of 
strange vicissitudes was over. The Austrians signed an armistice 
abandoning to the French all northern Italy as far as the Mincio'. 
Six months later Moreau won a decisive victory over the Aus- 
„ trians in Germany at Hohenlinden (December 3, 1800), thus 

defeats the opening the road to Vienna. Austria was now compelled to 
HohelTHnden sue for pcacc. The Treaty of Luneville (lii-na-vel') (Febru- 

(Decembera, ary 9, 1801) was in the main a repetition of the Treaty of 
1800) ^ . 

Campo rormio. 

As had been the case after Campo Formio, so now, after the break- 
up of this second coalition, France remained at war with only one 
nation, England. These two nations had been at war continuously 
for eight years. England had defeated the French navy and had 
En land and Conquered many of the colonies of France and of the allies or 
the Peace dependencies of France, that is, of Holland and Spain. She had 
miens j^^^ compelled the French in Egypt, the army left there by 
Bonaparte, to agree to evacuate that country. But her debt had 
grown enormously and there was widespread popular dislike of the 
war. A change in the ministry occurred, removing the great war 
leader, William Pitt. England agreed to discuss the question of 
peace. The discussion went on for five months and ended in the 
Peace of Amiens (a-me-an') (March, 1802). England recognized 
the existence of the French Republic. She restored all the French 
colonies and some of the Dutch and Spanish, retaining only Ceylon 
and Trinidad. She promised to evacuate Malta and Egypt, which 
the French had seized in 1798 and which she had taken from them. 
Nothing was said of the French conquest of Belgium and the left 
bank of the Rhine. This was virtual acquiescence in the new 



BONAPARTE'S POLITICAL OPINIONS 24T 

boundaries of France, which far exceeded those of the ancient 
monarchy. 

Thus Europe was at peace for the first time in ten years. Great 
was the enthusiasm in both France and England. The peace, how- 
ever, was most unstable. It lasted just one year. 

"BONAPARTE'S POLITICAL VIEWS 

Napoleon said on one occasion, "I am the Revolution." On 
another he said that he had "destroyed the Revolution." There 
was much error and some truth in both these statements. 

The Consulate, and the Empire which succeeded the Consulate, 
preserved much of the work of the Revolution and abolished much, in 
conformity with the ideas and also the personal interests of the ^^^ ^ inions 
new ruler. Bonaparte had very definite opinions concerning on the 
the Revolution, concerning the French people, and concerning ^^° " '*"* 
his own ambitions. These opinions constituted the most important 
single factor in the life of France after 1799. Bonaparte sympathized 
with, or at least tolerated, one of the ideas of the Revolution, Equal- 
ity. He detested the other leading idea, Liberty. In his youth he 
had fallen under the magnetic spell of Rousseau. But that had 
passed and thenceforth he dismissed Rousseau summarily as a 
"madman." He accepted the principle of equality because it alone 
made possible his own career and because he perceived the hold it 
had upon the minds of the people. He had no desire to restore the 
Bourbons and the feudal system, the incarnation of the principle 
of inequality and privilege. He stood right athwart the road to 
yesterday in this respect. It was he and his system that kept the 
Bourbons exiles from France fifteen years longer, so long indeed 
that when they did finally return it was largely without their ^j^ ^ ._ 
baggage of outworn ideas. Bonaparte thus prevented the tion to the 
restoration of the Old Regime. That was done for, for good egime 

and all. Privilege, abolished in 1789, remained abolished. The 
clergy, nobility, and third estate had been swept away. There 
remained only a vast mass of French citizens subject to the same 
laws, paying the same taxes, enjoying equal chances in life, as far as 
the state was concerned. The state showed no partiality, had no 
favorites. All shared in bearing the nation's burdens in proportion 
to their abilit}'. And no class levied taxes upon another — tithes 



242 THE CONSULATE 

and feudal dues were not restored. No class could exercise a mo- 
nopoly of any craft or trade — the guilds with all their restrictions 
remained abolished. Moreover, all now had an equal chance at 
public employment in the state or in the army. 




Josephine at Malmaison 
From the painting by Prudhon. 

Bonaparte summed this policy up in the phrase "careers open to 
talent." This idea was not original with him, it was contained in the 
Declaration of the Rights of Man. But he held it. Under him 



BONAPARTE AND THE REVOLUTION 243 

there were no artificial barriers, any one might rise as high as his 
ability, his industry, his service justified, always on condition of his 
loyalty to the sovereign. Every avenue was kept open to am- ., 
bition and energy. Napoleon's marshals, the men who at- open to 
tained the highest positions in his armies, were humbly born — *^'^°* 
Massena (ma-sa-na') .was the son of a saloon-keeper, Augereau 
(6zh-ro') of a mason, Ney (na) of a cooper, and Murat (mii-ra') of a 
country innkeeper. None of these men could have possibly become 
a marshal under the Old Regime, nor could Bonaparte himself have 
risen to a higher rank than that of colonel and then only when well 
along in life. Bonaparte did not think that all men are equal in 
natural gifts or in social position, but he maintained equality before 
the law, that priceless acquisition of the Revolution. 

He did not believe in liberty nor did he believe that, for that matter, 
the French believed in it. His career was one long denial or nega- 
tion of it. Neither liberty of speech, nor liberty of the press. The enemy 
neither intellectual nor political liberty received anything "^ liberty 
from him but blows and infringements. In this respect his rule 
meant reaction to the spirit and the practice of the Old Regime. It 
is quite true that the Convention and the Directory had also trampled 
ruthlessly upon this principle, but it is also quite true that neither 
he nor they could successfully defy what is plainly a dominant 
preoccupation, a deep-seated longing of the modern world. For the 
last hundred years the ground has been cumbered with those who 
thought they could silence this passion for freedom, and who found 
out, to their cost and the cost of others, that their efforts to imprison 
the human spirit were unavailing. There were still, after all these 
instructive hundred years, rulers who shared that opinion and acted 
upon it. They were able to preserve themselves and their methods 
of government in certain countries. But their day of reckoning 
came with the Great War as it came, a century earlier, for Napoleon 
himself. They were fighting for a losing cause, as the history of 
the modern world clearly proved. 

BONAPARTE'S POLICIES AS RULER 

The activities of Bonaparte as First Consul, after Marengo and 
during the brief interval of peace, were unremitting and far- as First 
reaching. It was then that he gave his full measure as a civil Consul 
ruler. He was concerned with binding up the wounds or open sores of 



244 THE CONSULATE 

the nation, with determining the precise form of the national institu- 
tions, with fashioning the mold through which the national life was 
to go pulsing for a long future, with consolidating the foundations 
of his power. A brief examination of this phase of his activity is 
essential to a knowledge of the later history of France, and to our 
appreciation of his own matchless and varied ability, of the power 
of sheer intellect and will applied to the problems of a society in flux. 
First, the party passions which had run riot for ten years must be 
quieted. Bonaparte's policy toward the factions was conciliation, 

coupled with stem and even savage repression of such ele- 
conciUation Hients as refused to comply with this primary requirement. 

There was room enough in France for all, but on one con- 
dition, that all accept the present rulers and acquiesce in the existing 
institutions and laws of the land. Offices would be open freely to 
former royalists, Jacobins, Girondists, on equal terms, no questions 

asked save that of loyalty. As a matter of fact Bonaparte 

Treatment of .... . . • , • r ^ 

emigre's and exercised his vast appomtmg power in this sense for the pur- 
non-jurmg pQgg Qf effacing all distinctions, all unhappy reminders of a 
troubled past. The laws against the emigres and the recalci- 
trant priests were relaxed. Of over 100,000 emigrants, all but 
about 1,000 irreconcilables received, by successive decrees, the 
legal right to return and to recover their estates, if these had not 
been already sold. Only those who placed their devotion to the 
House of Bourbon above all other considerations found the door 
resolutely closed. 

Bonaparte soon perceived that the strength of the Bourbon cause 
lay not in the merits or talents of the royal family itself or its aristo- 
cratic supporters, but in its close identification with the authorities 
of the Roman Catholic Church. Through all the angry religious 
warfare of the Revolution the mass of the people had remained 
faithful to the priests and the priests were subject to the bishops. 
The bishops had refused to accept the various laws of the Revolution 
concerning them and had as a consequence been driven from the 
country. They were living mostly in England and in Germany, 
taking their cue from the Pope, who recognized Louis XVIII, brother 
of Louis XVI, as the legitimate ruler of France. 

Thus the religious dissension was fused with political opposition — 
royalists and bishops were in the same galley. Bonaparte deter- 
mined to sever this connection, thus leaving the extreme royalists 



BONAPARTE'S RELIGIOUS POLICY 245 

high and dry, a staff of officers without an army. No sooner had he 
returned from Marengo than he took measures to show the Catholics 
that they had nothing to fear from him, that they could en- „ . . . 
joy their religion undisturbed if they did not use their liberty, undermine 
under cover of religion, to plot against him and against the * ^ '^°^ *^'^ 
Revolutionary settlement. He was in all this not actuated by any 
religious sentiment himself, but by a purely political sentiment — 
he was himself, as he said, "Mohammedan in Egypt, Catholic in 
France," not because he considered that either was in the exclusive or 
authentic possession of the truth, but because he was a man of sense 
who saw the futility of trying to dragoon by force men who were 
religious into any other camp than the one to which they naturally 
belonged. Bonaparte also saw that religion was an instrument which 
he might much better have on his side than allow to be on the side 
of his enemies. He looked on religion as a force in politics, nothing 
else. Purely political, not spiritual, considerations deter- 
mined his policy in now concluding with the Pope the famous considered 
treaty or Concordat, which reversed much of the work of the merely as a 
Revolutionary assemblies, and determined the relations of 
church and state in France for the whole nineteenth century. This 
important piece of legislation of the year 1802 lasted 103 years, 
being abrogated only under the present republic, in 1905. 



BONAPARTE AND THE CHURCH 

Bonaparte's thought was that by restoring the Roman Catholic 
Church to something like its former primacy he would weaken the 
royalists. The people must have a religion, he said, but the religion 
must be in the hands of the government. Many of his adherents 
did not agree at all with him in this attitude. They thought it far 
wiser to keep church and state divorced as they had been by the latest 
legislation of the Revolution. Bonaparte discussed the matter with 
the famous philosopher Volney (vol'-ni), whom he had just appointed 
a senator, saying to him, "France desires a religion." Volney ^^ ^^jj 
replied that France also desired the Bourbons. At this Bona- opposition to 
parte assaulted the philosopher and gave him such a kick '^ '''*" 
that he fell and lost consciousness. The army officers who were 
anti-clerical were bitter in their opposition and jibes, but Bonaparte 
went resolutely ahead. He knew the influence that priests exercise 



246 THE CONSULATE 

over their flocks and he intended that they should exercise it in his 
behalf. He meant to control them as he controlled the army and 
the thousands of state officials. The control of religion ought to 
be vested in the ruler. "It is impossible to govern without it," he 
said. He therefore turned to the Pope and made the treaty. "If 
the Pope had not existed," he said, " I should have had to create him 
for this occasion." 

By the Concordat the Catholic religion was recognized by the Re- 
public to be that "of the great majority of the French people" and its 
■free exercise was permitted. The Pope agreed to a reorganization 
involving a diminution in the number of bishoprics. He also recog- 
^.. ^t. ,. nized the sale of the church property effected by the Revolution. 

The Church r- r- ^ . , , , „. 

controlled by Henceforth the bishops were to be appointed by the First 
the state Consul but werc to be actually invested by the Pope. The 
bishops in turn were to appoint the priests, with the consent of the 
government. The bishops must take the oath of fidelity to the head 
of the state. Both bishops and priests were to receive salaries from 
the state. They really became state officials. 

The Concordat gave great satisfaction to the mass of the population 
for two reasons — it gave them back the normal exercise of the reli- 
gion in which they believed, and it confirmed their titles to the lands 
of the Church which they had bought during the Revolution, titles 
which the Church now recognized as legal. The Church soon found 
that Bonaparte regarded it as merely another source of influence, 
an instrument of rule. The clergy now became his supporters and 
in large measure abandoned royalism. Moreover Bonaparte, by 
additional regulations to which he did not ask the Pope's assent, 
bound the clergy hand and foot to his own chariot. 

The Concordat was nevertheless a mistake. France had worked 
out a policy of complete separation of church and state which, had it 
Concordat been allowed to continue, would have brought the blessing of 
a mistake toleration into the habits of the country. But the Concordat 
cut this promising development short and by tying church and state 
together in a union which each shortly found disagreeable it left 
to the entire nineteenth century an irritating and a dangerous 
problem. Nor did it preserve, for long, happy relations between 
Napoleon and the Pope. Not many years later a quarrel arose be- 
tween them which grew and grew until the Pope excommunicated 
Napoleon and Napoleon seized the Pope and kept him prisoner. 



THE CIVIL CODE 247 

Napoleon himself came to consider the Concordat as the worst 
blunder in his career. However, its immediate advantages were 
considerable. 

THE CODE NAPOLEON 

"My real glory," said Napoleon at St. Helena, "is not my having 
won forty battles. What will never be effaced, what will endure 
forever, is my Civil Code." He was undoubtedly mistaken 
as to the durability of this achievement, but he was correct in ^ systematic 

1 • • 1 • 1 1 1 • • , • , statement 

placuig It higher than that activity which occupied far more of the 
of his time. The famous Code Napoleon was an orderly, sys- prlnce 
tematic, compact statement of the laws of France. Pre-revolu- 
tionary France had been governed by a perplexing number of systems 
of law of different historical origins. Then had come, with the 
Revolution, a flood of new legislation, inspired by different principles 
and greatly increasing the sum total of laws in force. It was desir- 
able to sift and harmonize all these statutes, and to present to the 
people of France a body of law, clear, rational, and logically arranged, 
so that henceforth all the doubt, uncertainty, and confusion which 
had hitherto characterized the administration of justice might be 
avoided and every Frenchman might easily know what his legal 
rights and relations were, with reference to the state and his fellow- 
citizens. The Constituent Assembly, the Convention, the Directory, 
had all appreciated the need of this codification and had had com- 
mittees at work upon it, but the work had been uncompleted. Bona- 
parte now lent the driving force of his personality to the accomplish- 
ment of this task, and in a comparatively brief time the lawyers and 
the Council of State to whom he intrusted the work had it finished. 
The code to which Napoleon attached his name preserved the prin- 
ciple of civil equality established by the Revolution. It was imme- 
diately put into force in France and was later introduced into coun- 
tries conquered or influenced by France, Belgium, the German 
territories west of the Rhine, and Italy. 

Bonaparte's own direct share in this monumental work was consid- 
erable and significant. Though no lawyer hiniself, and with 
little technical knowledge of law, his marvelous intellectual ^hrrTi^thl 
ability, the precision, penetration, and pertinence of many of making of 

, . . . . .^ . ^ , , -^ , the Code 

his criticisms, suggestions, questions, gave color and tone and 
character to the complete work. He presided over many of the 



248 



THE CONSULATE 



sessions of the Council of State devoted to the elaboration of this 
code. "He spoke," says a witness, "without embarrassment and 
without pretension. He was never inferior to any member of the 
Council ; he often equaled the ablest of them by the ease with which 
he seized the point of a question, by the justness of his ideas and the 
force of his reasoning ; he often surprised them by the turn of his 
phrases and the originality of his expression." Called a new Con- 
stantine by the clergy for having made the Concordat, Bonaparte 
was considered by the lawyers a new Justinian. He was as a matter 
of fact, in many respects, 
the superior of both. 

During these years of 
the Consulate Bonaparte 

The Bank achieved many other 

of France things than those 
which have been men- 
tioned. He improved the 
system of taxation greatlj', 
and brought order into 
the national finances. He 
founded the Bank of France 
which still exists — and an- 
other institution which has 
come down to our own day, 
the Legion of Honor, for 
the distribution of honors 
and emoluments to those 

who rendered distinguished service to the state. Opposed as 
undemocratic, as offensive to the principle of equality, it was 
nevertheless instituted. Though open to those who had rendered 
civil service as well as to those who had rendered military, as a 
matter of fact Napoleon conferred only 1,400 crosses out of 48,000 
upon civilians. 

Nor did this exhaust the list of durable achievements of this 
crowded period of the Consulate. The system of national education 

National was in part reorganized, and industry and commerce received 

education ^^g interested attention of the ambitious ruler. Roads were 
improved, canals were cut, ports were dredged. The economic 
development of the country was so rapid as to occasion some uneasi- 
ness in England. 




The Three Consuls 
After the medal in bronze by Jeuffroy. 



The Legion 
of Honor 



BONAPARTE AND ROYALIST CONSPIRATORS 249 



Thus was carried through an extensive and profound renovation of 
the national life. This period of the Consulate is that par.t of Bona- 
parte's career which was most useful to his fellow-men, most contrib- 
utory to the welfare of his country. His work was not accomplished 
without risk to himself. As his reputation and authority increased, 
the wrath of those who saw their way to power barred by his formida- 
ble person increased sonaparte" 

also. At first the and the 

royalists had looked "^* 
to him to imitate the Eng- 
lish General Monk who 
had used his position for 
the restoration of Charles 
II. But Bonaparte had 
no notion of acting any 
such graceful and altruistic 
part. When this became 
apparent certain reckless 
royalists commenced to 
plot against him, began 
considering that it was pos- 
sible to murder him. An 
attack upon him occurred 
shortly after Marengo. 
Many lives were lost, but 
he escaped with his by the 
narrowest margin. 1 

A more serious plot was 
woven in London in the 
circle of the Count of 
Artois, younger brother of Louis XVI. The principal agents were 
Georges Cadoudal (ka-do-dal') and Pichegru (pesh-grii'). Bona- 
parte, through his police, knew of the plot. He hoped, in ^j^^ 
allowing it to develop, to get his hands on the Count of Artois. Cadoudai 
But the Count did not land in France. Cadoudal and his '=°'^^P"'3<=y 
accomplices were taken and shot. Pichegru was found strangled in 
prison. Bonaparte wished to make an example of the House of 
Bourbon which would be remembered. This led him to commit a 
monstrous crime. He ordered the seizure on German soil of the 




The Duke d'Enghien 

From an engraving after an original drawing by 
Count de Lely. 



250 THE CONSULATE 

young Duke d'Enghien (on-gian'). the Prince of Conde, a member 

of a branch of the Bourbon family. The prince, who was innocent 

of any connection whatever with the conspiracy, was abducted, 

„ . , brought to Vincennes (vin-senz') at five o'clock on the evening 

the Duke of March 20, 1804, was sent before a court-martial at eleven 

nghien o'clock and at half past two in the night was taken out into 

the courtyard and shot. This was assassination pure and simple 

and it was Bonaparte's own act. It has remained ever since an 

odious blot upon his name, which the multitudinous seas cannot 

wash out. Its immediate object, however, was achieved. The 

royalists ceased plotting the murder of the Corsican. 

NAPOLEON I, EMPEROR OF THE FRENCH (1804) 

A few days after this Bonaparte took another step forward in the 
consolidation of his powers. In 1802, after the Treaty of Amiens 
had been made, he had astutely contrived to have his consulate 
for ten years transformed into a consulate for life, with the right 
to name his successor. The only remaining step was taken in 1804, 
when a servile Senate approved a new constitution, declaring him 
Emperor of the French, "this change being demanded by the in- 
terests of the French people." It was at any rate agreeable to the 
French people, who in a popular vote or plebiscite ratified it over- 
whelmingly. Henceforth he was designated by his first name, in 
the manner of monarchs. It happened to be a more musical and 
sonorous name than most monarchs have possessed. 
( " I found the crown of France lying on the ground," Napoleon once 
said, "and I picked it up with my sword," a vivid summary of an 
important chapter in his biography. 

REFERENCES 

Napoleon's Personal Qualities : Taine, Modern Regime, Vol. I, pp. i-qo; 
Rose, J. H., The Personality of Napoleon. 

The Campaign of 1800: Ropes, The First Napoleon, pp. 49-58; Fournier, 
Napoleon I, pp. 188-208; Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. I, pp. 221-245. 

Bonaparte's Policies as First Consul : Fisher, Napoleon, Chap. IV ; 
Fournier, Chap. IX, pp. 221-241 ; Johnston, Napoleon, Chap. VII, pp. 88-102; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, pp. 148-187; Rose, J. H., pp. 11 2-147. 

Napoleon and the Revolution : Fisher, Bonapartism, pp. 7-24. 



CHAPTER XI 

THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

The Empire lasted ten years, from 1804 to 1814. It was a period of 
uninterrupted warfare in which a long series of amazing victories was 
swallowed up in final, overwhelming defeat. The central, over- 
mastering figure in this agitating story, dominating the decade so 
completely that it is known by his name, was this man whose The Napo- 
ambition vaulted so dizzily, ortly to o'erleap itself. Napoleon '^°°'^ ^^^ 
ranks with Alexander, Cssar, Charlemagne (char'-le-man), as one 
of the most powerful conquerors and rulers of history. It would be 
both interesting and instructive to compare these four. It is by no 
means certain that Napoleon would not be considered the greatest 
of them all. Certainly we have far more abundant information 
concerning him than we have concerning the others. 

PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS 

When he became emperor he was thirty-five years old and was in 
the full possession of all his magnificent powers. For he was marvel- 
ously gifted. His brain was a wonderful organ, swift in its processes, 
tenacious in its grip, lucid, precise, tireless, and it was served by an 
incredibly capacious and accurate memory. "He never blundered 
into victory," says Emerson, "but won his battles in his head, before 
he won them on the field." All his intellectual resources were avail- 
able at any moment. He said of himself, "Different matters are 
stowed away in my brain as in a chest of drawers. When I wish to 
interrupt a piece of work I close that drawer and open another. None 
of them ever get mixed, never does this inconvenience or fatigue 
me. When I feel sleepy I shut all the drawers and go to sleep." 

Napoleon possessed a varied and vivid imagination, was always, as 
he said, "living two years in advance," weaving plans and dreams and 
then considering coolly the necessary ways and means to realize them. 

251 



252 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

This union of the practical and the poetic, the reaUstic and the imagi- 
native, each raised to the highest pitch, was rendered potent by a will 
that recognized no obstacles, and by an almost superhuman activity. 
Napoleon loved work, and no man in Europe, and few in all history, 
have labored as did he. "Work is my element, for which I 
dinary ' was born and fitted," he said at St. Helena, at the end of his 
capacity }ifg "J have known the limits of the power of my arms and 

for work 

legs. I have never discovered those of my power of work." 
Working twelve or sixteen and, if necessary, twenty hours a day, 
rarely spending more than fifteen or twenty minutes at his meals, 
able to fall asleep at will, and to awaken with his mind instantly alert, 
he lost no time and drove his secretaries and subordinates at full 
speed. We gain some idea of the prodigious labor accomplished by 
him when we consider that his published correspondence, comprising 
23,000 pieces, fills thirty-two volumes and that 50,000 additional 
letters dictated by him are known to be in existence but have not 
yet been printed. Here was no do-nothing king but the most 
industrious man in Europe. Happy, too, only in his work. The 
ordinary pleasures of men he found tedious, indulging in them only 
His bearing when his position rendered it necessary. He rarely smiled, 
in society ^g never laughed, his conversation was generally a monologue, 
but brilliant, animated, trenchant, rushing, frequently impertinent 
and rude. He had no scruples and he had no manners. He was 
ill-bred, as was shown in his relations with women, of whom he had 
a low opinion. His language, whether Italian or French, lacked 
distinction, finish, correctness, but never lacked saliency or interest. 
The Graces had not presided over his birth, but the Fates had. He 
had a magnificent talent as stage manager and actor, setting the 
scenes, playing the parts consummately in all the varied ceremonies 
in which he was necessarily involved, coronation, reviews, diplomatic 
audiences, interviews with other monarchs. His proclamations, his 
bulletins to his army were masterpieces. He could cajole in the 
silkiest tones, could threaten in the iciest, could shed tears or burst 
into violence, smashing furniture and bric-a-brac when he felt that 
such actions would produce the effect desired. The Pope, Pius VII, 
seeing him once in such a display of passion, observed, "tragedian," 
"comedian." 

He had no friends, he despised all theorists like those who had 
sowed the fructifying seeds of the Revolution broadcast, he harried all 



NAPOLEON'S PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS 253 

opponents out of the country or into silence, he made his ministers 
mere hard-worked servants, but he won the admiration and devo- 
tion of his soldiers by the glamour of his victories, he held the His mastery 
peasantry in the hollow of his hand by constantly guaran- °^ others 
teeing them their lands, and their civil equality, the things which 
were, in their opinion, the only things in the Revolution that counted. 
He was as little as he was big. He would lie shamelessly, would cheat 
at cards, was superstitious in strange ways. He was a man of whom 
more evil and more good can be said and has been said than of many 
historical figures. He cannot be easily described, and certainly not 
in any brief compass. 

Now that Napoleon was emperor he proceeded to organize the state 
imperially. Offices with high-sounding, ancient titles were created 
and filled. There was a Grand Chamberlain, a Grand Marshal „ 

/ Napoleon 

of the Palace, a Grand Master of Ceremonies, and so on. A establishes 
court was created, expensive, and as gay as it could be made ^ *^°"'^' 
to be at a soldier's orders. The Emperor's family, declared Princes 
of France, donned new titles and prepared for whatever honors 
and emoluments might flow from the bubbling fountain-head. The 
court resumed the manners and customs which had been in vogue 
before the Revolution. Republican simplicity gave way to imperial 
pretensions, attitudes, extravagances, pose. The constitu- crowned in 
tion was revised to meet the situation, and Napoleon was Notre Dame 
crowned in a memorable and sumptuous ceremony in Notre Dame, 
the Pope coming all the way from Rome to assist — but not to crown. 
At the critical point in the splendid ceremony Napoleon crowned 
himself and then crowned the Empress. But the Pope poured 
the holy oil upon Napoleon's head. This former lieutenant of 
artillery thus became the "anointed of the Lord," in good though 
irregular standing. He crowned himself a little later King of Italy, 
after he had changed the Cisalpine Republic into the Kingdom of 
Italy (1805). 

The history of the Empire is the history of ten j^ears of uninter- 
rupted war. Europe saw a universal menace to the independence and 
liberty of all states in the growing and arrogant ascendancy The period 
of France, an ascendancy and a threat all the more obvious °? *^^ ^■^; 

-^ pire one of 

and dangerous now that that country was absolutely in the uninterrupted 
hands of an autocrat, and that too an autocrat who had grown ^^^ 
great by war and whose military tastes and talents would now have 



254 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 




« 9 



NAPOLEON AS EMPEROR 



255 




Napoleon i\ the Imperial Robes 
From an engraving after the picture by Gerard. 

free rein. Napoleon was evoking on every occasion, intentionally 
and ostentatiously, the imperial souvenirs of Julius Csesar and of 
Charlemagne. What could this mean except that he planned to rule 
not only France, but Europe, consequently the world ? Unless the 



256 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

other nations were willing to accept subordinate positions, were 
willing to abdicate their rank as equals in the family of nations, 
they must fight the dictatorship which was manifestly impending. 
Fundamentally this is what the ten years' war meant, the right of 
other states to live and prosper, not on mere sufferance of Napoleon, 
but by their own right and because universal domination or the undue 
ascendancy of any single state would necessarily be dangerous to the 
other states and to whatever elements of civilization they represented. 
France already had that ascendancy in 1 804. Under Napoleon she 
En land the "^^^e a tremendous effort to convert it into absolute and 
constant universal domination. She almost succeeded. That she 

enemy failed was due primarily to the steadfast, unshakable oppo- 

sition of one power, England, which never acquiesced in her preten- 
sions, which fought them at every stage with all her might, through 
Sea- ower good report and through evil report, stirring up opposition 
versus land- whcrever she could, weaving coalition after coalition, using her 
power money and her navy untiringly in the effort. It was a war 

of the giants. A striking aspect of the matter was the struggle 
between sea-power, directed by England, and land-power, directed 
by Napoleon. 



THE THIRD COALITION AGAINST FRANCE 

While the Empire was being organized in 1 804 a new coalition was 
being formed against France, the third in the series we are studying. 

Reasons for England and France had made peace at Amiens in 1802. 

England's That pcacc lasted only a year, until May 17, 1803. Then 
°^ * ^ the two states flew to arms again. The reasons were vari- 

ous. England was jealous of the French expansion which had been 
secured by the treaties of Campo Formio and Luneville, French 
control of the left bank of the Rhine, French domination over con- 
siderable parts of the Italian peninsula, particularly French conquest 
of Belgium, including the fine port of Antwerp. England had always 
been opposed to French expansion, particularly northward along the 
Channel, which Englishmen considered and called the English 
Channel. The English did not wish any rival along those shores. 
However, despite this, they had finally consented to make the Peace 
of Amiens. The chief motive had been the condition of their in- 
dustries. The long war, since 1793, had damaged their trade enor- 



THE END OF THE PEACE OF AMIENS 257 

mously. They hoped, by making peace with France, to find the 
markets of the Continent open to them once more, and thus to revive 
their trade. But they shortly saw that this was not at all the 
idea of France. Napoleon wished to develop the industries of ness of the 
France, wished to have French industries not only supply the ^^^."^^ °^ 

' J r-r- J Amiens 

French market, but also win the markets of the other countries 
on the Continent. He therefore established high protective tariffs 
with this end in view. Thus English competition was excluded or at 
least greatly reduced. The English were extremely angry and did 
not at all propose to lie down supinely, beaten without a struggle. 
That had never been their custom. War would be less burdensome, 
said their business men. For England, commerce was the very 
breath of life. Without it she could not exist. This explains why, 
now that she entered upon a struggle in its defense, she did not lay 
down her arms again until she had her rival safely imprisoned on the 
island of St. Helena. 

There were other causes of friction between the two countries which 
rendered peace most unstable. With both nations ready for war, 
though not eager for it, causes for rupture were not hard to find. Renewal of 
War broke out between them in May, 1803. Napoleon imme- J|*^^^^ 
diately seized Hanover, a possession in Germany of the English France and 
king. He declared the long coast of Europe from Hanover England 
southward and eastward to Taranto in Italy blockaded, that is, 
closed to English commerce, and he began to prepare for an invasion 
of England itself. This was a difficult task, requiring much time, 
for France was inferior to England on the seas and yet, unless she 
could control the Channel for a while at least, she could not send an 
army of invasion. Napoleon established a vast camp of 150,000 
men at Boulogne to be ready for the descent. He hastened the con- 
struction of hundreds of flatboats for transport. Whether all this 
was mere make-believe intended to alarm England, whether he knew 
that after all it was a hopeless undertaking, and was simply display- 
ing all this activity to compel England to think that peace would be 
wiser than running the risk of invasion, we do not positively know. 

At any rate England was not intimidated. She prepared 
for defense, and she also prepared for offense by seeking and buUds up a 
finding allies on the Continent, by building up a coalition °^^ '^°^^^- 
which might hold Napoleon in check, which might, it was 
hoped, even drive France back within her original boundaries, taking 



258 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

away from her the recent acquisitions of Belgium, the left bank of the 
Rhine, and the Italian annexations and protectorates. England made 
a treaty to this effect with Russia, which had her own reasons for 
opposing Napoleon — her dread of his projects in the Eastern Medi- 
terranean at the expense of the Turkish Empire. For if any one was 
to carve up the Turkish Empire, Russia wished to do it herself. The 
English agreed to pay subsidies to the Czar, a certain amount for 
every 100,000 men she should furnish for the war. 

Finally in 1805 Austria entered the coalition, jealous of Napoleon's 

Austria aggressions in Italy, anxious to wipe out the memory of the 

joins the defeats of the two campaigns in which he had conquered her 

coaition ^^ j^^^ ^^^ 1800, eager, also, to recover the position she had 

once held as the dominant power in the Italian peninsula. 



NAPOLEON'S THIRD CAMPAIGN AGAIN3T AUSTRIA 

Such was the situation in 1805. When he was quite ready Na- 
poleon struck with tremendous effect, not against England, which he 
could not reach because of the silver streak of sea that lay between 
them, not against Russia, which was too remote for immediate 
attention, but against his old-time enemy, Austria, and he bowled 
her over more summarily and more humiliatingly than he had ever 
done before. 

The campaign of 1805 was another Napoleonic masterpiece. The 
Austrians, not waiting for their allies, the Russians, to come up, had 
sent an army of 80,000 men under General Mack up the Danube into 
Bavaria. Mack had taken his position at Ulm, expecting that 
Napoleon would come through the passes of the Black Forest, the 
most direct and the usual way for a French army invading southern 
Germany. But not at all. Napoleon had a very different plan. 
Napoleon Sending enough troops into the Black Forest region to confirm 
Mack at Mack in his opinion that this was the strategic point to hold, 

Ulm and thus keeping him rooted there. Napoleon transferred his 

Grand Army from Boulogne and the shores of the English Channel, 
where it had been training for the past two years, across Germany 
from north to south, a distance of 500 miles, in twenty-three days 
of forced marches, conducted in astonishing secrecy and with mathe- 
matical precision. He thus threw himself into the rear of Mack's 
army, between it and Vienna, cutting the line of communication, 



THE BATTLE OF AUSTERLITZ 259 

and repeating the strategy of the Great Saint Bernard and Marengo 
campaign of 1800. Mack had expected Napoleon to come from the 
west through the Black Forest. Instead, when it was too late, he 
found him coming from the east, up the Danube, toward Ulm. 
Napoleon made short work of Mack, forcing him to capitulate at 
Ulm, October 20. "I have accomplished what I set out to do," he 
wrote Josephine. "I have destroyed the Austrian army by means 
of marches alone." It was a victory won by legs — 60,000 prisoners, 
120 guns, more than thirty generals. It had cost him only 1,500 men. 

The way was now open down the Danube to Vienna. Thither, 
along poor roads and through rain and snow. Napoleon rushed, cover- 
ing the distance in three weeks. Vienna was entered in triumph and 
without resistance, as the Emperor Francis had retired in a north- 
easterly direction, desiring to effect a junction with the oncoming 
Russian army. Napoleon followed him and on December 2, xhe battle 
1805, won perhaps his most famous victory, the battle of Aus- °/ Auster- 
terlitz, on the first anniversary of his coronation as Emperor. (Oecem- 
AU day long the battle raged. The sun breaking through the ^^'^ ^' ^^°^^ 
wintry fogs was considered a favorable omen by the French and hence- 
forth became the legendary symbol of success. The fighting was 
terrific. The bravery of the soldiers on both sides was boundless, 
but the generalship of Napoleon was as superior as that of the 
Austro- Russians was faulty. The result was decisive, overwhelming. 
The allies were routed and sent flying in every direction. They had 
lost a large number of men and nearly all of their artillery. Na- 
poleon, with originally inferior numbers, had not used all he had, 
had not thrown in his reserves. No wonder he addressed his xhe " Sun of 
troops in an exultant strain. "Soldiers, I am satisfied with Austeriitz " 
you. In the battle of Austeriitz you have justified all my expecta- 
tions by your intrepidity ; you have adorned your eagles with 
immortal glory." No wonder that he told them that they were 
marked men, that on returning to France all they would need to say 
in order to command admiration would be : "I was at the battle of 
Austeriitz." 

The results of this brief and brilliant campaign were various and 
striking. The Russians did not make peace but withdrew in The Treaty of 
great disorder as best they could to their own country. But fDecembfr 
Austria immediately signed a peace and a very costly one, too. 26, 1805 j 
By the Treaty of Pressburg, dictated by Napoleon, who now had 



26o THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

beaten her disastrously for the third time, she suffered her greatest 
humihation, her severest losses. She ceded Venetia, a country she 
had held for eight years, since Campo Formio, to the Kingdom 
of Italy, whose king was Napoleon. I stria and Dalmatia also she 
ceded to Napoleon. Of all this coast line of the upper Adriatic she 
retained only the single port of Trieste. Not Austria but France 
was henceforth the chief Adriatic power. The German principal- 
ities, Bavaria and Baden, had sided with Napoleon in the late cam- 
paign and Austria was now compelled to cede to each of them some 
of her valuable possessions in South Germany. Shut out of the 
Adriatic, shut out of Italy, Austria lost 3,000,000 subjects. She 
became nearly a land-locked country. Moreover she was compelled 
to acquiesce in other changes that Napoleon had made or was about 
to make in various countries. 



NAPOLEON THE KING-MAKER 

Napoleon began now to play with zest the congenial role of Charle- 
magne, about which he was prone to talk enthusiastically and with 
rhetorical extravagance. Having magically made himself Emperor, 
he now made others kings. As he abased mountains so he exalted 
valleys. In the early months of 1806 he created four kings. He 
raised Bavaria and Wiirtemberg, hitherto duchies, to the rank of 
kingdoms, "in grateful recompense for the attachment they have 
shown the Emperor," he said. During the campaign the King of 
Naples had at a critical moment sided with his enemies. Napoleon 
therefore issued a simple decree, merely stating that "The House 
of Bourbon has ceased to rule in Naples." He gave the vacant throne 
to his brother Joseph, two years older than himself. Joseph, who had 
first studied to become a priest, then to become an army officer, and 
still later to become a lawyer, now found himself a king, not by the 
grace of God, but by the grace of a younger brother. 

The horn of plenty was not yet empty. Napoleon, after Auster- 

litz, forced the Batavian Republic, that is, Holland, to become a mon- 

Makes Hoi- ^^chy and to accept his brother Louis, thirty-two years of 

land a age, as its king. Louis, as mild as his brother was hard, thought 

monarc y ^-j^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ consult the interests and win the 

affections of his subjects. As this was not Napoleon's idea, Louis 

was destined to a rough and unhappy, and also brief, experience as 



NAPOLEON THE KING-MAKER 



261 



king. "When men say of a king that he is a good man, it means 
that he is a failure," was the information that Napoleon sent Louis 
for his instruction. 

The number of kingdoms at Napoleon's disposal was limited, 
temporarily at least. But he had many other favors to bestow, 

which were -not The family 

to be despised. *="''=^® 
Nor were they de- 
spised. His sister 
Elise was made Prin- 
cess of Lucca and 
Carrara, his sister 
Pauline, a beautiful 
and luxurious young 
creature, married 
Prince Borghese (bor- 
ga'-se) and became 
Duchess of Guastalla 
(gwas-tal'-la), and his 
youngest sister, Caro- 
line, who resembled 
him in strength of 
character, married 
Murat, the dashing 
cavalry oflficer, who 
now became Duke of 
Berg, an artificial 
state which Napoleon 
created along the 
lower Rhine. 

Two brothers, 
Lucien and Jerome, 
were not provided for, and thereby hangs a tale. Each had Lucien and 
incurred Napoleon's displeasure, as each had married for love Jerome in 
and without asking his consent. He had other plans for them 
and was enraged at their independence. Both were expelled from 
the charmed circle, until they should put away their wives and marry 
others according to Napoleon's taste, not theirs. This Lucien stead- 
fastl}^ refused to do and so he who, by his presence of mind on the 




Joseph Bonaparte, KrNO of Naples 
After the painting by J. B. J. Wicar. 



262 



THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 



19th of Brumaire, had saved the day and rendered all this story pos- 
sible, stood outside the imperial favor, counting no more in the 
history of the times. When Jerome, the youngest member of this 

astonishing family, and made 
of more pliable stuff, awoke 
from love's young dream, at 
the furious demands of Na- 
poleon, and put away his 
beautiful American bride, the 
•Baltimore belle, Elizabeth 
Patterson, then he too became 
a king. All who worshiped 
]\Iammon in those exciting 
days received their appropri- 
ate reward. 

It would be pleasant to 
continue this catalogue of 
favors, scattered right and left 
by the man who had rapidly 
grown so great. Officials of 
the state, generals of the army, 
and more distant relatives re- 
ceived glittering prizes and 
went on their way rejoicing, anxious for more. Appetite is said to 
grow by that on which it feeds. 




Louis Bonaparte, King of Holiand 
After the painting by Wicar, engraved by Read. 



THE TRANSFORMATION OF GERMANY 

More important far than this flowering of family fortunes was 
another result of the Austerlitz campaign, the transformation of 
Germany, effected by the French with the eager and selfish coopera- 
tion of many German princes. That transformation, which greatly 
reduced the distracting number of German states, by allowing 
of German some to absorb others, had already been going on for several 
^*d**^ d years. When France had acquired the German territory west 

of the river Rhine, it had been agreed, in the treaties of Campo 
Formio and Luneville, that the princes thus dispossessed should 
receive compensations east of the river Rhine. This obviously could 
not be done literally and for all, as every inch of territory east of the 



CHANGES IN THE iMAP OF GERMANY 



263 



Rhine already had its ruler. As a matter of fact the change was 
worked out by compensating only the hereditary rulers. There were, 
both on the left bank and on the right and all throughout Germany, 

many petty states whose 
rulers were not hereditary — 
ecclesiastical states, and free 
imperial cities. Now these 
were tossed to the princes 
who ruled by hereditary 
right, as compensation for 
the territories they had lost 
west of the river Rhine. 
This wholesale destruction 
of petty German states for 
the advantage of other lucky 
German states was accom- 
plished not by the Germans 
themselves, which would 
have been shameless Paris the 

, , ^ center for 

enough, but was ac- the brisk 

complished in Paris. t^a®<= "* 

Germaa 

In the antechambers of lands 
the First Consul, particularly 
in the parlors of Talleyrand 
(tal'-i-rand), the disgraceful 
begging for pelf went on. Talleyrand grew rapidly rich, so many 
were the "gifts" —one dreads to think what they would be called 
in a vulgar democracy — which German princes gave him for his 
support in despoiling their fellow-Germans. For months the dis- 
gusting traffic went on and, when it ended in the "Conclusion" of 
March, 1803, really dictated by Bonaparte, the number of German 
principalities had greatly decreased. All the ecclesiastical states of 
Germany, with one single exception, had disappeared and of the 
fifty free cities only six remained. All went to enlarge other states. 
At least the map of Germany was simpler, but the position of the 
Church and of the Empire was greatly altered. Of the 360 states 
which composed the Holy Roman or German Empire in 1792 only 
eighty-two remained in 1805. 

All this had occurred before Austerlitz. After Austerlitz the pace 




Elise Bonaparte, Princess of Lucca 

From an anonymous engraving, after the 
painting by Counis. 



264 



THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 



Austerlitz 
campaign 



was increased, ending in the complete destruction of the Empire. 

of th P^^'is again became the center of German politics and intrigues, 
as in 1803. The result was that in 1806 the new kings of 
Bavaria and Wiirtemberg and fourteen other German princes 

renounced their allegiance to the German Emperor, formed a new 

Confederation of the Rhine (July 12, 1806), recognized Napoleon 
as their "Protector," made an offensive and defensive alliance 
fhe confel with him which gave 

erationof ^q him the COntrol of 

the Rhine , . . . ,. 

their foreign pohcy, 
the settlement of questions of 
peace and war, and guaran- 
teed him 63,000 German 
troops for his wars. Fresh 
annexations to these states 
were made. Thus perished 
many more petty German 
states, eagerly absorbed by 
the fortunate sixteen. 

Perished also the Holy 

Roman Empire which had 

been in existence, real 

Destruction , , , 

of the Holy or shadowy, for a 
Roman thousand years. The 

Empire . ^ . 

secession of the sixteen 
princes and the formation of 
the Confederation of the 
Rhine killed it. It was only 
formal interment, therefore, 

when Napoleon demanded of the Emperor Francis, whom he had 
defeated at Austerlitz, that he renounce his title as Holy Roman 
Emperor. This Francis hastened to do (August 6, 1806), content- 
ing himself henceforth with the new title he had given himself 
two years earlier, when Napoleon had assumed the imperial title. 
Henceforth he who had been Francis II of the Holy Roman Empire 
was called Francis I, Hereditary Emperor of Austria. 

Napoleon, who could neither read nor speak a word of German, 
was now the real ruler of a large part of Germany, the strongest 
factor in German politics. To French domination of West Ger- 




Pauline Bonaparte, Princess Borghese 
After the painting by I.efevre. 



FRENCH INFLUENCE IN GERMANY 



265 




Cakoline Bonaparte, Duchess oi iitki., a.\u Marie AIlrat 
From the painting by Vigee le Bnm. 



many, annexed to France earlier, came an important increase of in- 
fluence. 1 1 was now that French ideas began in a modified form pjend, in- 
to remold the civil life of South Germany. Tithes were abol- fluence in 
ished, the inequality of social classes in the eyes of the law ^'''^^^y 
was reduced though not destroyed, religious liberty was established, 



266 



THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 



the position of the Jews was improved. The Germans lost in self- 
respect from this French domination, the patriotism of such as were 
patriotic was sorely wounded at the sight of this alien rule, but in the 
practical contrivances of a modernized social life, worked out. by the 
French Revolution, and now in a measure introduced among them, 
they had a salutary compensation. 



THE CONQUEST OF PRUSSIA 

While all this shifting of scenes was being effected Napoleon had 
kept a large army in South Germany. The relations with Prussia, 

which country had been 
neutral for the past ten 
years, since the Treaty of 
Basel of 1795, were becoming 
strained and grew rapidly 
more so. The policy of the 
Prussian King, Frederick 
WiUiam HI, was weak, 
^■acillating, covetous. His 
diplomacy was playing fast 
and loose with his obligations 
as a neutral and with his 
desires for the territorial 
aggrandizement of Prussia. 
Napoleon's attitude was in- 
solent and contemptuous. 
Both sides made an unen- 
viable but characteristic 
record in double-dealing. 
The sordid details, highly 
discreditable to both, cannot 
be narrated here. Finally 
the war party in Berlin got the upper hand, led by the high-spirited 
and beautiful Queen Louise and by the military chiefs, relics of the 
glorious era of Frederick the Great, who thought they could do 
what Frederick had done, that is, defeat the French with ease. As if 
to give the world some intimation of the terrible significance of their 
displeasure they went to the French Embassy in Berlin and bravely 




Joachim Murat, Duke of Berg 
After the painting by Gros. 



THE WAR PARTY IN BERLIN 



267 



whetted their swords upon its steps of stone. The royahst officers 
at Versailles in the early days of the Revolution had shown no 
more inane folly in playing with fire than did^the Prussian military 
caste at this time. The one had learned its lesson. The other was 
now to go to the same pitiless school of experience. 




Jerome Bonaparte 

Engraved by I. G. Miiller, knight, and Frederich Miiller, son, engravers to his 
Majesty the King of Wiirtemberg, after a drawing by Madame Kinson. 

Hating France and having an insensate confidence in their own 
superiority, the Prussian war party forced the government to 
issue an ultimatum to Napoleon, Emperor of the French, France and 
demanding that he withdraw his French troops beyond the ?'^^^* 
Rhine. Napoleon knew better how to give ultimatums than 
how to receive them. He had wat"ched the machinations of the 



268 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

Prussian ruling class with close attention. He was absolutely pre- 
pared when the rupture came. He now fell upon them like a cloud- 
burst and administered a crushing blow in the two battles of Jena 
Jena and ^.ud Auerstadt, fought on the same day at those two places, a 
Auerstadt fg^ miles apart (October 14, 1806), he himself in command 
of the former, Davout of the latter. The Prussians fought bravely, 
but their generalship was bad. Their whole army was disorganized, 
became panic-stricken, streamed from the field of battle as best 
it could, no longer receiving or obeying orders, many throwing 
away their arms, fleeing in every direction. Thousands of prisoners 
were taken and in succeeding days French officers scoured the 
country after the fugitives, taking thousands more. The collapse 
was complete. There was no longer any Prussian army. One after 
another all the fortresses fell. 

On the 25th of October Napoleon entered Berlin in triumph. He 
had previously visited the tomb of Frederick the Great at Potsdam 
in order to show his admiration for his genius. He had the ex- 
enters Ber- ecrable taste, however, to take the dead Frederick's sword and 

lin (October g^g]^ ^^d Send them to Paris as trophies. "The entire king- 
25, 1806) ^ ° 

dom of Prussia is in my hands," he announced. He planned 

that the punishment should be proportionate to his rage. He drew 
up a decree deposing the House of Hohenzollern but did not issue it, 
waiting for a spectacular moment. He laid enormous war contribu- 
tions upon the unhappy victim. 

Napoleon postponed the announcement of the final doom until he 

should have finished with another enemy, Russia. Before leaving 

The Berlin Berlin for the new campaign he issued the famous Decrees 

agTiLtr which declared the British Isles in a state of blockade and 

England prohibited commerce with them on the part of his dominions 

and those of his allies. 



THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RUSSIA 

In the campaign of 1806 the Russians had been allied with the 
Prussians although they had taken no part, as the latter had not 
waited for them to come up. Napoleon now turned his attention to 
them. Going to Warsaw, the leading city of that part of Poland 
which Prussia had acquired in the partition of that country, he 
planned the new campaign, which was signalized by two chief battles. 



THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RUSSIA 269 

Eylau (i-lou) and Friedland. The former was one of the most 
bloody of his entire career. Fighting in the midst of a bhnding 
snow-storm on February 8, 1807, Napoleon narrowly escaped Eyiau and 
defeat. The slaughter was frightful — "sheer butchery," said Fnediand 
Napoleon later. "What carnage," said Ney, "and no results," 
thus accurately describing this encounter. Napoleon managed to 
keep the field and in his .usual way he represented the battle as a 
victory. But it was a drawn battle. For the first time in Europe 
he had failed to win. The Russian soldiers fought with reckless 
bravery — "it was necessary to kill them twice," was the way the 
French soldiers expressed it. 

Four months later, however, on June 14, 1807, on the anniversary of 
Marengo, Napoleon's star shone again unclouded. He won a victory 
at Friedland which, as he informed Josephine, "is the worthy The battle 
sister of Marengo, Austerlitz, and Jena." The victory was fj^^l^fl^^^ 
at any rate so decisive that the Czar, Alexander I, consented 1807) 
to make overtures for peace. The Peace of Tilsit was concluded 
by the two Emperors in person after many interviews, the first 
one of which was held on a raft in the middle of the river Niemen. 
Not only did they make peace but they went further and made a 
treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive. Napoleon gained a great 
diplomatic victory, which completely altered the previous dip- ^ ^ 
lomatic system of Europe, a fitting climax to three years of Russia be- 
remarkable achievement upon the field of battle. Exercising *^°™® *^**^ 
upon Alexander all his powers of fascination, of flattery, of imagina- 
tion, of quick and sympathetic understanding, he completely won 
him over. The two Emperors conversed in the most dulcet, raptur- 
ous way. "VVhy did not we two meet earlier?" exclaimed the 
enthusiastic Czar of All the Russias. With their two imperial 
heads bowed over a map of Europe they proceeded to divide it. 
Alexander was given to understand that he might take Finland, which 
he coveted, from Sweden, and attractive pickings from the vast 
Turkish Empire were dangled somewhat vaguely before him. On 
the other hand, he recognized the changes Napoleon had made or 
was about to make in western Europe, in Italy, and in Germany. 
Alexander, was to offer himself as a mediator between those bitter 
enemies, England and France, and, in case England declined to 
make peace, then Russia would join France in enforcing the conti- 
nental blockade, which was designed to bring England to terms. 



270 



THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 



Napoleon out of regard for his new friend and ally promised to 

allow Prussia still to exist. The decree dethroning the House of 

Prussia dis- Hohenzollern was never issued. But Napoleon's terms to 

membered Prussia were very severe. She must give up all her territory 

west of the river Elbe. Out of this and other German territories 





i3 


'0^' .: - -' -'. 


L 


1 '..- ,J| 



Napoleon Receiving Qiieen Louise of Prussia at Tilsit, July 6, 1807 
After the painting by Gosse. 

Napoleon now made the Kingdom of Westphalia, which he gave to 
his brother Jerome, who had by this time divorced his American 
wife. Prussia's eastern possessions were also diminished. Most of 
what she had acquired in the partitions of Poland was taken from her 



NAPOLEON CREATES NEW STATES 



271 



and created into the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, to be ruled over by the 
sovereign of Saxony, whose title of Elector Napoleon at this juncture 
now changed into that of King. These three states, Westpha- 
lia, Saxony, and the Duchy of Warsaw now entered the Con- federation of 
federation of the Rhine, whose name thus became a misnomer, *^f Rhine 

enlarged 

as the Confederation included not only the Rhenish and South 
German states but stretched from France to the Vistula, including 
practically all Germany except Prussia, now reduced to half her 
former size, and except 
Austria. 

Naturally Napoleon 
was in high feather as 
he turned homeward. 
Naturally, also, he was 
pleased with the Czar. 
"He is a handsome, 
good young emperor, 
with more mind than 
he. is generally credited 
with" — such was Na- 
poleon's encomium. 
Next to being sole 
master of all Europe 
came the sharing of 
mastery with only one 
other. A few months 
later he wrote his new 
ally that "the work of 
Tilsit will regulate the 
destinies of the world." 
There only remained 
the English, "the active 

islanders," not yet charmed or conquered. In the same letter to 
the Czar Napoleon refers to them as "the enemies of the world" 
and told how they could be easily brought to book. He had 
forgotten, or rather he had wished to have the world forget, ^f Trafalgar 
that there was one monstrous flaw in the apparent perfection of (October 21, 
his prodigious success. Two years before, on the very day 
after the capitulation of Ulm, Admiral Nelson had completely de- 




LoRD Nelson 

From an engraving by S. Freeman, after the paint- 
ing by Abbott. 



272 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 

stroyed the French fleet in the battle of Trafalgar (October 21, 1805), 
giving his life that England might live and inspiring his own age 
and succeeding ages by the cry, "England expects every man to 
do his duty !" 

The French papers did not mention the battle of Trafalgar, but it 
nevertheless bulks large in history. This was Napoleon's second 
taste of sea-power, his first having been, as we have seen, in Egypt, 
several years before, also at the hands of Nelson. 

Napoleon returned to Paris in the pride of power and of supreme 
achievement. But, it is said, pride cometh before a fall. Was the 
race mistaken when it coined this cooling phrase of proverbial 
wisdom ? It remained to be seen. 

REFERENCES 

Napoleon Becomes Emperor : Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. I, Chap. XX, 
pp. 429-444; Fournier, Napoleon I, pp. 278-282; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. IX, pp. 107-122. 

The Austerlitz Campaign: Fisher, Napoleon, pp. 125-142; Johnston, 
Napoleon, pp. 119-129; Ropes, The First Napoleon, pp. 108-117; Fournier, 
Chap. XI, pp. 282-324; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 1-46. 

Trafalgar : Mahan, Influence of Sea-Power upon the French Revolution and 
Napoleon, Vol. II, Chap. XVI; Mahan, Life of Nelson, Vol. I, Chap. X; Vol. 
II, Chaps. XVI and XXIII. 



CHAPTER XII 



THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 



After Tilsit there remained England, always England, as the 
enemy of France. In 1805 Napoleon had defeated Austria, in 1806 
Prussia, in 1807 Russia. Then the last-named power had shifted 

its policy completely, had 
changed partners, and, dis- 
carding its former allies, had 
become the ally of its former 
enemy. 

Napoleon was now in a 
position to turn his attention 
to England. As she was 
mistress of the seas, as she 
had at the battle of Trafal- 
gar in 1805 destroyed the 
French navy, the Emperor 
was compelled to find 

^, -r ,1 Napoleon 

Other means, if there now free to 
were any, of humbling ^^^\ ^i'^* 

, . ^ England 

the elusive enemy. 
England must be beaten, 
but how? Napoleon now 
adopted a policy which the 
Convention and the Direc- 
tory had originated. Only 
he gave to it a gigantic 
application and development. This was the Continental System, 
or the Continental Blockade. If England could not be conquered 
directly by French fleets and armies, she might be conquered 
indirectly. 

273 




Queen Louise of Prussia 
From an engraving by Ruscheweyh. 



274 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 

ENGLAND AND THE CONTINENTAL BLOCKADE 

England's power lay in her wealth, and her wealth came from her 

factories and her commerce which carried their products to the 

„ markets of the world, which brought her the necessary raw 

Commerce " ■' 

vital to materials, and which kept open the fruitful connection with 

°^ *° her scattered colonies. Cut this artery, prevent this com- 

merce, close these markets, and her prosperity would be destroyed. 
Manufacturers would be compelled to shut down their factories. 
Their employees, thrown out of work, would face starvation. With 
that doom impending, the working classes and the industrial and 
commercial classes, threatened with ruin, would resort to terrific 
pressure upon the English government, to insurrections, if necessarj-, 
to compel it to sue for peace. Economic warfare was now to be tried 
on a colossal scale. By exhausting England's resources it was hoped 
and expected that England would be exhausted. 

By the Berlin Decrees (November, 1806), Napoleon declared a 

blockade of the British Isles, forbade all commerce with them, all 

The Berlin Correspondence, all trade in goods coming from England or her 

Decrees colonies, and ordered the confiscation and destruction of all 

English goods found in France or in any of the countries allied 

with her. No vessel coming from England or England's colonies 

should be admitted to their ports. To this England replied by severe 

Orders in Council, which Napoleon capped by additional decrees, 

issued from Milan. 

This novel form of warfare had very important consequences. 
This struggle with England dominates the whole period from 1807 
Epochal to 1 8 14. It is the central thread that runs through all the 

theTtru'°e ^^'^g^^'^ ^^^d tumultuous history of those years. There were 
with Eng- plays withiu the play, complications and struggles with other 
'^"'^ nations which sometimes rose to such heights as momen- 

tarily to obscure the titanic contest between sea-power and land- 
power. But the fundamental, all-inclusive contest, to which ajl 
else was subsidiary or collateral, was the war to the knife between 
these two, England and France. Everywhere we see its influence, 
whether in Spain or Russia, in Rome or Copenhagen, along the 
Danube or along the Tagus. 

The Continental System had this peculiarity, that, to be successful 
in annihilating English prosperity and power, it must be applied 



NAPOLEONIC ANNEXATIONS 275 

everywhere and constantly. The Continent must be sealed her- 
metically against English goods. Only then, with their necessary 
markets closed to them everywhere, would the English be 
forced to yield. Let there be a leak anywhere, let there be a nentai 
strip of coast, as in Portugal or Spain or Italy, where English Sy^^f".*'^ 
ships could touch and land their goods, and through that 
leak England could and would penetrate, could and would distribute 
her wares to eager customers, thus escaping the industrial strangu- 
lation intended by the Emperor of the French. This necessity 
Napoleon saw clearly. It was never absent from his mind. It 
inspired his conduct at every step. It involved him inevitably and, 
in the end, disastrously, in a policy of systematic and widespread 
aggressions upon other countries, consequently in a costly succession 
of wars. 

To close simply the ports of France and of French possessions to 
English commerce would not at all accomplish the object aimed at. 
Napoleon must have the support of every other seaboard country in 
Europe. This he sought to get. He was willing to get it peacefully 
if he could, prepared to get it forcibly if he must. He secured the ad- 
hesion of Russia by the Treaty of Tilsit. Austria and Prussia, having 
been so decisively beaten, had to consent to apply the system to their 
dominions. Little Denmark, perforce, did the same when .,, 

'^ Attempts to 

the demand came. Sweden, on the other hand, adhered to enforce the 
the English alliance. Consequently Russia was urged to lead^to*^^ 
take Finland, which belonged to Sweden, with its stretch of repeated acts 
coast line and its excellent harbors. Napoleon's brother ° aggression 
Louis, King of Holland, would not enforce the blockade, as to do so 
meant the ruin of Holland. Consequently he was in the end forced 
to abdicate and Holland was annexed to France (18 10). France also 
annexed the northern coasts of Germany up to Liibeck, including the 
fine ports of Bremen and Hamburg and the mouths of those rivers 
which led into central Germany (1810). In Italy the Pope wished 
to remain neutral but there must be no neutrals, in Napoleon's and 
also in England's opinion, if it could be prevented. In this case it 
could. Consequently Napoleon annexed part of the Papal 
States to the so-called Kingdom of Italy, of which he was him- Rupture 

!<• , T^- 1 , • , ,■ , , • , with the 

self the Kmg, and part he mcorporated directly and without pope 
ado into the French Empire (1809). Immediately the Pope 
excommunicated him and preached a holy war against the impious 



276 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 

conqueror. Napoleon in turn took the Pope prisoner and kept him 
such for several years. This was injecting the religious element again 
. into politics, as in the early days of the Revolution, to the profound 
embitterment of the times. Some of these events did not occur 
immediately after Tilsit but did occur in the years from 1809 to 181 1. 

WAR WITH PORTUGAL AND SPAIN 

What did occur immediately after Tilsit was a famous and fatal 
misadventure in Portugal and Spain. Portugal stood in close 
Attack u on economic and political relations with England and was reluctant 
Portugal to enforce the restrictions of the Continental Blockade. Her 

coast line was too important to be allowed as an open gap. 
Therefore Napoleon arranged with Spain for the conquest and parti- 
tion of that country. French and Spanish armies invaded Portugal, 
aiming at Lisbon. Before they arrived Napoleon had announced 
in his impressive and laconic fashion that "the fall of the House of 
Braganza furnishes one more proof that ruin is inevitable to whom- 
soever attaches himself to the English." The royal family escaped 
capture by sailing for the colony of Brazil and seeking safety be- 
yond the ocean. There they remained until the overthrow of 
Napoleon. 

This joint expedition had given Napoleon the opportunity to intro- 
duce large bodies of troops into the country of his ally, Spain. They 
now remained there, under Murat, no one knew for what purpose, 
Th ittia- — ^"^ ^^^' ^^*^^P^ Napoleon, in whose mind a dark and devious 
tion in plan was maturing. The French had dethroned the House of 

Spam Bourbon in France during the Revolution. Napoleon had 

himself after Austerlitz dethroned the House of Bourbon in Naples 
and had put his brother Joseph in its place. There remained a 
branch of that House in Spain, and that branch was in a particularly 
corrupt and decadent condition. The King, Charles IV, was utterly 
incompetent ; the Queen, grossly immoral and endowed with the 
tongue of a fishwife ; her favorite and paramour, Godoy, was the 
real power behind the throne. The whole unsavory group was 
immensely unpopular in Spain. On the other hand, the King's son, 
Ferdinand, was idolized by the Spanish people, not because of any' 
thing admirable in his personality, which was utterly despicable, 
but because he was opposed to his father, his mother, and Godoy. 



EUROPE IN 1811 



277 




278 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 

Napoleon thought the situation favorable to his plan, which was to 
seize the throne thus occupied by a family rendered odious by its 
character and impotent by its dissensions. By a treacherous and 
hypocritical diplomacy he contrived to get Charles IV, the Queen, 
Godoy, and Ferdinand to come to Bayonne in southern France. 
No hungry spider ever viewed more coolly a more helpless prey 
entangled in his web. By a masterly use of the black arts of dis- 
simulation, vituperation, and intimidation he swept the whole royal 
crew aside. Charles abdicated his throne into the hands of Napoleon, 
who thereupon forced Ferdinand to renounce his rights under a 
thinly veiled threat that, if he did not, the Duke d'Enghien would 
^ , hot be the only member of the House of Bourbon celebrated 

JNapoleon -' 

makes his for an untoward fate. Ferdinand and his brothers were sent 
Joseph' King ^^ prisoners to a chateau at Valengay. The vacant throne 
of Spain was then given by Napoleon to his brother Joseph, who there- 

upon abdicated the kingship of Naples, which now passed to 
Murat, Napoleon's brother-in-law. 

Napoleon later admitted that it was this Spanish business that de- 
stroyed him. "I embarked very badly on the Spanish affair, I 
confess ; the immorality of it was too patent, the injustice too cyn- 
ical." But this was the judgment of retrospect. He entered upon 
the venture with a light heart, confident that at most he would 
encounter only a feeble opposition. "Countries full of monks like 
yours," he told Ferdinand, "are easy to subdue. There may be 
some riots, but the Spaniards will quiet down when they see that I 
offer them the integrity of the boundaries of their kingdom, a liberal 
constitution, and the preservation of their religion and their national 
The Span- customs." Contrary to his expectation the conduct of the 
iards rise Spaniards was quite the reverse of this. He might offer them, 
in revo ^^ j^^ ^.^^ better government than they had ever had. They 

hated him as a thief and trickster, also as a heretic, as a man whose 
character and policies and ideas were anathema. Napoleon em- 
barked on a five years' war with them, which baffled him at every 
stage, drained his resources, in a contest that was inglorious, resources 
which should have been husbanded most carefully for more important 
purposes. "If it should cost me 80,000 men" to conquer Spain, 
"I would not attempt it," he said at the beginning, "but it will not 
take more than 12,000." A ghastly miscalculation, for it was to take 
300,000 and to end in failure! 



THE COSTLY SPANISH ADVENTURE 279 

He encountered in Spain an opposition very different in kind and 
quality from any he had met hitherto in Italy or Germany, baffling, 
elusive, wearing. Previously he had waged war with gov- 
ernments only and their armies, not with peoples rising as arouses the 
one man, resolved to die rather than suffer the loss of their sp''!'* °[. 

nationalism 

independence. The people of Italy, the people of Austria, 
the people of Germany, had not risen. Their governments had not 
appealed to them, but had relied upon their usual weapon, profes- 
sional armies. Defeating these, as Napoleon had done with com- 
parative ease, the governments had then sued for peace and endured 
his terms. No great wave of national feeling, daring all, risking all, 
had swept over the masses of those countries where he had hitherto 
appeared. France had herself undergone this very experience, and her 
armies had won their great successes because they were aglow with 
the spirit of nationality, which had been so aroused and intensified 
by the Revolution. Now other countries were to take a page out of 
her book, at the very time when she was showing a tendency to forget 
that page herself. The Spanish rising was the first of a series of 
popular, national, instinctive movements that were to end in Na- 
poleon's undoing. 

The kind of warfare that the Spaniards carried on was peculiar, 
determined by the physical features of the land and by the cir- 
cumstances in which they found themselves. Lacking the character of 
leadership of a government — their royal family being virtu- ^^'^ '" Spain 
ally imprisoned in France — poor, and without large armies, they 
fought as guerrillas, little bands, not very formidable in themselves 
individually, but appearing now here, now there, now everywhere, 
picking off small detachments, stragglers, then disappearing into their 
mountain fastnesses. They thus repeated the history of their long 
struggles with the Moors. Every peasant had his gun and every 
peasant was inspired by loj^alty to his country, and by religious zeal, 
as the Vendeans (ven-de'-anz) had been. The Catholic clergy 
entered again upon the scene, fanning the popular animosity against 
this despoiler of the Pope, and against these French free-thinkers. 
Napoleon had aroused two mighty forces which were to dog his 
footsteps henceforth, that of religious zeal, and that of the spirit of 
nationality, each with a fanaticism of its own. 

Even geography, which Napoleon had hitherto made minister to 
his successes, was now against him. The country was poor, the roads 



28o THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 

were execrable, the mountains ran in the wrong direction, right 

across his path, the rivers also. In between these successive moun- 

Geography tain ranges, in these passes and valleys, it was difficult for large 

against hiin armies, such as Napoleon's usually were, to operate. It was 

easy for mishaps to occur, for guerrilla bands or small armies to cut 

off lines of communication, for them to appear in front and in the 

rear at the same time. The country was admirable for the defensive, 

difficult for the offensive. This was shown early in the war when 

General Dupont (dii-pofi') was caught in a trap and obliged to 

capitulate with an army of 20,000 at Baylen (bl-len') (July, 1808). 

This capitulation produced a tremendous impression throughout 

Europe. It was the first time a French army corps had been 

The capitu- n , , • r n • %^ 

lation of Compelled to ground arms m full campaign. It was the 

ff^/^" o ON heaviest blow Napoleon had yet received in his career. It 

(July, 1808) ^ ■' 

encouraged the Spaniards, and other peoples also, who were 
only waiting to see the great conqueror trip and who were now 
fired with hope that the thing might be done again. Napoleon was 
enraged, stormed against the unfortunate army, declared that from 
the beginning of the world nothing "so stupid, so silly, so cowardly" 
had been seen. They had had a chance to distinguish themselves, 
"they might have died," he said. Instead they had surrendered. 

Joseph, the new King, who had been in his capital only a week, left 

it hurriedly and withdrew toward the Pyrenees, writing his brother 

King Joseph ^^^^ Spain was like no other country, that they must have an 

seeks safety army of 50,000 to do the fighting, another of 50,000 to keep 

'^ open the line of communications, and 100,000 gallows for 

traitors and scoundrels. 

There was another feature of this war in the Peninsula, England's 

participation. An army was sent out under Sir Arthur Wellesley, 

^ ,. , later Duke of Wellington, to cooperate with the Portuguese 

The English ,„ . , ^ir i, , i , , , i ,• • • , ,, • 

join in the ^'^^ Spaniards. Wellesley, who had already distinguished him- 

famMrn ^^'^ "^^ India, now began to build up a European reputation 

as a careful, original, and resourceful commander. Landing 

at Lisbon, the expedition shortly forced the French commander 

Junot (zhii-no') to capitulate at Cintra (August, 1808), as Dupont 

had been forced to in the preceding month at Baylen. 

These were disasters which Napoleon could not allow to stand 
unanswered. His prestige, his reputation for invincibility, must 
remain undiminished or Europe generally would become restless 



THE ERFURT INTERVIEW 281 

with what result no one could foretell. He resolved therefore to 
go to Spain himself and show the Spaniards and all other peoples 
how hopeless it was to oppose him, how minor and casual Napoleon 
defeats of his subordinates meant nothing, how his own mighty go^°o^spahi 
blows could no more be parried than before. But, before himself 
going, he wished to make quite sure of the general European situa- 
tion. 



TREATY BETWEEN NAPOLEON AND ALEXANDER OF RUSSIA 

He arranged, therefore, for an interview at Erfurt in the center of 
Germany with his ally, Alexander of Russia. The two emperors 
spent a fortnight discussing their plans, examining every phase of the 
international situation (September- October, 1808). This Erfurt 
fnterview was the most spectacular * episode in Napoleon's The Erfurt 
career as a diplomatist. He sought to dazzle Europe with his interview 
might, to impress the imaginations of men, and their fears, to show 
that the Franco- Russian alliance, concluded at Tilsit the year before, 
stood taut and firm and could not be shaken. All the kings and 
princes of Germany were summoned to give him, their "Protector," 
an appropriate and glittering setting. Napoleon brought with him 
the best theatrical troupe in Europe, the company of the Theatre 
Frangais, and they played, as the pretentious expression was, to 
"a parterre of kings." .On one occasion when Talma, the famous 
tragedian, recited the words, 

" The friendship of a great man 
Is a true gift of the gods," 

the Czar arose, seized Napoleon's hand, and gave the signal for 
applause. Day after day was filled with festivities, dinners, balls, 
hunts, reviews. The gods of German literature and learning, Goethe 
and Wieland, paid their respects. Meanwhile the two allies care- 
fully canvassed the situation. In general the Czar was cordial, 
for he saw his profit in the alliance. But now and then a little rift in 
the lute appeared. One day, as they were discussing, Napoleon 
became angry, threw his hat on the floor, and stamped upon it. 
Alexander merely observed, "You are angry, I am stubborn. With 
me anger gains nothing. Let's talk, let's reason together, or I shall 
leave." 



282 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 

NAPOLEON CONQUERS SPAIN 

The result of the interview was in the main satisfactory enough to 
both. The accord between the two seemed complete. The alliance 
was renewed, a new treaty was made, which was to be kept secret 
"for ten years at least," and now Napoleon felt free to direct his 
attention to the annoying Spanish problem, resolved to end it once 
for all. Assembling a splendid army of 200,000 men, he crossed the 
Enters Pyrenees and in a brief campaign of a month he swept aside all 

^^ecember obstacles with comparative ease, and entered Madrid (Decem- 
1808) ber, 1808). There he remained a few weeks sketching the 

institutions of the new Spain which he intended to create. It would 
certainly have been a far more rational and enlightened and pro- 
gressive state than it ever had been in the past. He declared the 
Inquisition, which still existed, abolished ; also the remains of the 
feudal system ; also the tariff boundaries which shut off province 
from province to the great detriment of commerce. He closed two- 
thirds of the monasteries, which were more than superabundant in 
the land. But, just as no individual cares to be reformed under the 
compulsion of a master, so the Spaniards would have nothing to do 
with these modern improvements in the social art, imposed by a 
heretic and a tyrant, who had wantonly filched their throne and 
invaded their country. 

Napoleon might perhaps have established his control over Spain 

so firmly that the new institutions would have struck root, despite 

this opposition. But time was necessary, and time was 

Napoleon ^'^ ^ 

hurries back something he could not command. In Madrid only a month, 
to Pans ]^g ^g^g compelled to hurry back to France because of alarming 

news that reached him. He never returned to Spain. 

AUSTRIA AND FRANCE AGAIN AT WAR 

Austria had thrown down the gantlet again. It was entirely 
natural for her to seek at the convenient opportunity to avenge the 
humiliations she had repeatedly endured at the hands of France, 
to recover the position she had lost. Moreover, the close alliance of 
Russia and France and Napoleon's seizure of the Spanish crown filled 
her with alarm. If Napoleon was capable of treating in this way a 
hitherto submissive ally, such as Spain had been, what might he 
not do to a chronic enemy and now a mere neutral like Austria, 



THE WAR OF 1809 WITH AUSTRIA 283 

particularly as the latter had nowhere to look for support since 
Russia had deserted the cause. Moreover, Austria had learned 
something from her disastrous experiences ; among other 

^1 • ^1 ^ 1 • •!• 1 r • • Reform in 

thmgs that her previous military system was defective m the mUitary 
that it made no appeal to the people, to national sentiment, system of 

1 r- f » Austria 

After Austerlitz the army was reorganized and a great mihtia 
was created composed of all m.en between the ages of eighteen and 
twenty-five. A promising invigoration of the national consciousness 
began. What occasion could be more convenient for paying off old 
scores and regaining lost ground than this, with Napoleon weakened 
by the necessity of holding down a spirited and outraged nation like 
the Spanish, resolved to go to any lengths, and by the necessity of 
checking or crushing the English in Portugal ? 

Under the influence of such considerations the war party gained the 
ascendancy, and Austria, under the lead of Archduke Charles, brother 
of the Emperor and a very able commander, began a war in the spring 
of 1 809. This war, which Napoleon did not seek, from which he had 
nothing to gain, was another Austrian mistake. Austria should have 
allowed more time for the full development of her new military 
system before running perilous risks again. 

The Austrians paid for their precipitancy. Napoleon astonished 
them again by the rapidity of his movements. In April, 1809, he 
fought them in Bavaria, five battles in five days, throwing them Napoleon 
back. Then he advanced down the Danube, entered Vienna conquers 

Austria for 

without difficulty, and crossed the river to the northern bank, the fourth 
whither the army of the Archduke had withdrawn. There Na- *"°® 
poleon fought a two days' battle at Aspern and Essling (May 21-22)- 
The fighting was furious, the village of Essling changing hands nine 
times. Napoleon was seriously checked. He was obliged to take refuge 
for six weeks on the Island of Lobau in the Danube, until additional 
troops were brought up from Italy, and from Germany. Then, when 
his army was sufficiently reenforced, he crossed to the northern bank 
again and fought the great battle of Wagram (July 5-6). He 

. , . A 1 ■ The battle 

was victorious but m no superlative sense as at Austerlitz. of Wagram 
The Archduke's army retired from the field in good order. (J"iy 5-6, 
The losses had been heavy, but no part of the army had been 
captured, none of the flags taken. This was the last victorious cam- 
paign fought by Napoleon. Even in it he had won his victory with 
unaccustomed difficulty. His army was of inferior quality, many of ^ 



284 



THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT 



The Treaty 
of Vienna 
(October, 
1809) 



his best troops being detained by the inglorious Spanish adventure, 

and the new soldiers proving inferior to the old veterans. Moreover, 

he was encountering an opposition that was stronger in numbers, 

because of the army reforms just alluded to, while opposing generals 

were learning lessons from 

a study of his methods 

and were turning them 

against him. Archduke 

Charles, for instance, 

revered Napoleon's genius 

but he now fought him 

tooth and nail and with 

ability. 

After Wagram, Austria 
again made peace with 

Napoleon, the 

Peace of Vienna 

or of Schonbrunn. 
Austria was obliged to 
relinquish extensive terri- 
tories. Galicia, which 
was the part of Poland 
she had acquired in the 
famous partitions, now 
went — apart of it to the 
Grand Duchy of Warsaw, 
a part of it to Russia. 
She was also forced to 
cede to France Trieste, Carniola, and part of Carinthia and Croatia. 
These were made into the lUyrian Provinces, which were declared 
imperial territory, although not formally annexed to France. Austria 
lost 4,000,000 subjects, nearly a sixth of all that she possessed. She 
lost her only port and became entirely land-locked. 




Empress Marie Louise 
From a picture by Prudhon. 



NAPOLEON MARRIES MARIE LOUISE OF AUSTRIA 

Having defeated Austria for the fourth time. Napoleon treated 
Europe to one of those swift transformation scenes of which he was 
fond as showing his easy and incalculable mastery of the situation. 



REFERENCES 285 

He contracted a marriage alliance with the House of Hapsburg which 
he had so repeatedly humbled, one of the proudest royal houses in 
Europe. He had long considered the advisability of a divorce from 
Josephine, as she had given him no heir and as the stability of the 
system he had erected depended upon his having one. At his 
demand the Senate dissolved his marriage with Josephine, and the 
ecclesiastical court in Paris was even more accommodating, declaring 
that owing to some irregularity the marriage had never taken place 
at all. Free thus by action of the state and the church he asked the 
Emperor of Austria for the hand of his daughter, the Archduchess 
Marie Louise, and received it. This political marriage was con- 
sidered advantageous on both sides. It seemed likely to prevent any 
further trouble between the two countries, to serve as a protection to 
Austria, to raise Napoleon's prestige by his connection with one of 
the oldest and proudest reigning houses of Europe, and to insure 
the continuance of the regime he had established with such display 
of genius. Thus, only seventeen years after the execution of Marie 
Antoinette, another Austrian princess sat upon the throne of France. 
The marriage occurred in April, 18 10, and in the following year was 
born the son for whom the title "King of Rome" stood ready. 

REFERENCES 

Napoleonic Creations: Fisher, pp. 153-168; Fournier, Chap. XII, pp. 
325-355; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 166-173. 

The Campaigns against Prussia and Russia : Johnston, Chap. X, pp. 
130-140; Fournier, Chap. XIII, pp. 356-385 ; Rose, Vol. II, Chaps. XXV and 
XXVI ; Fyffe, Chap. VII ; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 46-54. 

Tilsit: Fyffe, Chap. VII; Fournier, pp. 385-390; Rose, Vol. II, Chap. 
XXVII, pp. 115-128. 

The Continental System : Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 
5 20-537 ; Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. II, Chap. XXVI, pp. 95-99 ; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. IX, pp. 361-389. 

The Attack upon Spain and the Erfurt Interview: Fisher, Napoleon, 
pp. 168-180; Johnston, iVa/'o/co», pp. 147-155; Yo\xxr\ier, Napoleon I , pp. 427- 
453; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 146-173. 

The AusTRLf^N Campaign of 1809: Fisher, pp. 181-189; Ropes, The First 
iVa/»o/eoH, pp. 141-150; Johnston, pp. 157-174; Fournier, pp. 254-294; Rose, 
Vol. II, Chap. XXX, pp. 174-191- 



CHAPTER XIII 

THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

Napoleon was now at the zenith of his power. He ruled directly 

over an empire that was far larger than the former Kingdom of France. 

In 180Q he annexed what remained of the Papal States in 

Napoleon ^ . ^ 

at the zenith Italy, together with the incomparable city of Rome, thus 
of his power gj^^jj^g, for the time at least, the temporal power of the Pope. 
In 1 8 10 he forced his brother Louis to abdicate the kingship of 
Holland, which country was now incorporated in France. He also, as 
has already been stated, extended the Empire along the northern 
coasts of Germany from Holland to Liibeck, thus controlling Ham- 
burg, Bremen, and the mouths of the important German rivers. 
Each one of these annexations was in pursuance of his policy of the 
Continental Blockade, closing so much more of the coast line of 
Europe to the commerce of England, the remaining enemy which he 
„. now expected to humble. Napoleon was Emperor of a state that 

His power ^ c ir- 

outside of had 1 30 departments. He was also King of Italy, a state in the 
'^""^^ northeastern part of the peninsula. He was Protector of the 

Confederation of the Rhine, which included all Germany except 
Prussia and Austria, a confederation which had been enlarged since 
its formation by the addition of Westphalia and Saxony and the 
Grand Duchy of Warsaw, extending, therefore, clear up to Russia. 
His brother Joseph was King of Spain, his brother Jerome King of 
Westphalia, his brother-in-law Murat King of Naples. All were 
mere satellites of his, receiving and executing his orders. Russia was 
his willing ally. Prussia and Austria were also his allies, the former 
because forced to be, the latter at first for the same reason, and later 
because she saw an advantage in it. No ruler in history had ever 
dominated so much of Europe. This supreme, incomparable pre- 
eminence had been won by his sword, supplemented by his remarkable 
statesmanship and diplomacy. 

England alone remained outside the pale, England alone had not 

286 • 



WEAKNESS OF THE NAPOLEONIC SYSTEM 287 

been brought to bend the knee to the great conqueror. Even she was 
breathing heavily, because the Continental System was inflicting ter- 
rible damage upon her. Factories were being forced to shut ^^g,^j^^ 
down, multitudes of laborers were being thrown out of work shows signs 
or were receiving starvation wages, and riots and other evidences 
of unrest and even desperation seemed to indicate that even she must 
soon come to terms. 



ELEMENTS OF WEAKNESS OF THE NAPOLEONIC STRUCTURE 

But this vast and imposing fabric of power rested upon uncertain 
bases. Built up, story upon storj^ by a highly imaginative and 
able mind, the architect left out of reckoning or despised the strains 
and stresses to which it was increasingly subjected. The rapidity 
with which this colossal structure fell to pieces in a few years shows 
how poorly consolidated it was, how rickety and precarious its foun- 
dations. Erected b}^ the genius of a single man, it depended 
solely upon his life and fortunes — and fortune is notoriously based on 
fickle. Built up bv war, by conquest, it was necessarily en- ^""^^ ^!^'^ 

^ -'■''■ ' ■' despotism 

vironed by the hatred of the conquered. With every advance, 
every annexation, it annexed additional sources of discontent. Based 
on force, it could only be maintained by force. There could be and 
there was in all this vast extent of empire no common loyalty to the 
Emperor. Despotism, and Napoleon's regime was one of pitiless 
despotism, evoked no loyalty, only obedience based on fear. Europe 
has always refused to be dominated by a single nation or by a single 
man. It has run the risk several times in its history of passing under 
such a yoke, but it always in the end succeeded in escaping it. 
Universal dominion is an anachronism. The secret of Great Britain's 
hold upon many of the component parts of her empire lies in the 
fact that she allows them liberty to develop their own life in their 
own way. But such a conception was utterly beyond Napoleon, 
contrary to all his instincts and convictions. His empire meant 
the negation of liberty in the various countries which he dominated, 
France included. Napoleon's conquests necessarily ranged 
against him this powerful and unconquerable spirit. The waits for the 
more conquests, the more enemies, only waiting intently for J^f""" °? 

/• , 1 • 1 , • 1 r liberation 

the moment of liberation, scanning the horizon everywhere for 

the first sign of weakness which to them would be the harbinger 



288 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

of hope. This they found in Spain, and in the Austrian campaign of 
1809 in which the machinery of miUtary conquest had creaked, had 
worked clumsily, had threatened at one moment to break down. 

There was a force in the world which ran directly counter to Napo- 
leon's projects, the principle of nationality. Napoleon despised this 
feeling, and in the end it was his undoing. He might have 
con^temp°for seen that it had been the strength of France a few years 
the spirit of earlier, that now this spirit had passed beyond the natural 

nationality , , . , ... ,., 

boundaries and was wakmg mto a new life, was nerving to a 
new vigor, countries like Spain, even Austria, and, most conspicuously, 
Prussia. 

REORGANIZATION OF PRUSSIA 

Prussia after Jena underwent the most serious humiliation a nation 
can be called to endure. For several years she was under the iron 
Prussia heel of Napoleon, who kept large armies quartered on her soil, 

after Jena ^^g drained her resources, who interfered peremptorily in the 
management of her government, who forbade her to have more than 
42,000 soldiers in her army. But out of the very depths of this 
national degradation came Prussia's salvation. Her noblest spirits 
were aroused to seek the causes of this unexpected and immeasurable 
national calamity and to try to remedy them. From 1808 to 18 12 
Prussians, under the very scrutiny of Napoleon, who had eyes but 
did not see, worked passionately upon the problem of national regen- 
eration. The . result surpassed belief. A tremendous national 
patriotism was aroused by the poets and thinkers, the philosophers 
and teachers, all bending their energies to the task of quickening 
among the youth the spirit of unselfish devotion to the fatherland. 
An electric current of enthusiasm, of idealism, swept through the 
educational centers and through large masses of the people. The 
University of Berlin, founded in 1809, in Prussia's darkest hour, 
was, from the beginning, a dynamic force. It and other universities 
became nurseries of patriotism. 

Prussia underwent regeneration in other ways. Particularly 

memorable was the work of two statesmen. Stein and Harden- 

serfdom in berg. Stein, in considering the causes of Prussia's unexampled 

Prussia woes. Came to the conclusion that they lay in her defective or 

harmful social and legal institutions. The masses of Prussia 

were serfs, bound to the soil, their personal liberty gravely re- 



STEIN'S REFORMS IN PRUSSIA 



stricted, and, as Stein said, "patriots cannot be made out of serfs." 
He persuaded the King to issue an edict of emancipation, abolishing 
serfdom. The Prussian king, he said, was no longer "the king of 
slaves, but of free men." Many other reforms were passed abolishing 
or reducing class distinctions and privileges. In all this Stein was 
largely imitating the French Revolutionists who by their epoch- stein's re- 
making reforms had forms show 

the influence 

released the ener- of the French 
gies of the French Revolution 
so that their power had 
been vastly augmented. 
The army, too, was re- 
organized, opportunity 
was opened to talent, as in 
France, with what magi- 
cal results we have seen. 
As Napoleon forbade that 
the Prussian army should 
number more than 42,000 
men, the ingenious device 
was adopted of having 
men serve with the colors 
only a brief time, only 
long enough to learn the 
essentials of the soldier's 
life." Then they . 

-^ Army re- 
WOuld pass into the forms in 

reserve and others ^'■"^^'^ 
would be put rapidly 
through the same train- 
ing. By this method 
several times 42,000 men received a military training whose effec- 
tiveness was later to be proved. 

Thus Prussia's regeneration proceeded. The new national spirit, 
wonderfully invigorated, waited with impatience for its hour of 
probation. It should be noted, however, that these reforms, which 
resembled in many respects those accomplished in France by the 
Constituent Assembly and the Convention, and which were in fact 
suggested by them, rested, however, on very different principles. 




Baron vom Stein 
From an engraving by Liitzenkirchen. 



290 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

There was in Prussia no assertion of the Rights of Man, no procla- 
mation of the people as sovereign. In Prussia it was the king 
j^ . ... who made the reforms, not the people. The theory of the 
by Prussia divine right of the monarch was not touched but was main- 
cratuTprin- tained as sacred as ever. There was reform in Prussia but no 
cipies of revolution. Prussia took no step toward democracy. This dis- 

governmen ^jnction colored the whole subsequent history of that kingdom. 
"Everything for the people, nothing by the people," was evidently 
the underlying principle in this work of national reorganization. 
Even these reforms were not carried out completely, owing to 
opposition from within the kingdom and from without. But, though 
incomplete, they were very vitalizing. 

THE CHURCH HOSTILE TO NAPOLEON 

Napoleon's policies had created other enmities in abundance which 
were mining the ground beneath him. His treatment of the Pope, 
whom he held as a prisoner and whose temporal power he had abol- 
ished by incorporating his states, a part in the French Empire and a 
part in the Kingdom of Italy, made the Catholic clergy everywhere 
hostile, and offended the faithful. Rome, hitherto the papal capital, 
was declared the second city of the Empire and served as a title for 
Napoleon's son. All rights of the Pope were thus cavalierly ignored. 
The vast and subtle influence of the Church was of course now 
directed to the debasement of the man it had previously conspicuously 
favored and exalted. In addition to combating the rising tide of 
nationality, Napoleon henceforth also had his quarrel with the 
Papacy. 

DISASTROUS EFFECTS OF THE CONTINENTAL BLOCKADE 

Into these entanglements he had been brought by the necessities of 
his conflict with England, by the Continental Blockade. For it 
was that system that drove him on from one aggression to another, 
from annexation to annexation. That system, too, created profound 
discontent in all the countries of the Continent, including France itself. 
By enormously raising the price of such necessaries, as cotton and 
sugar and cofifee and tea, products of Britain's colonies or of the 
tropical countries with which she traded, they introduced hardship 
and irritation into every home. The normal course of business was 



EFFECTS OF THE CONTINENTAL BLOCKADE 291 



turned inside out and men suddenly found their livelihood gone and 
ruin threatening or already upon them. To get the commodities 
to which they were accustomed they smuggled on a large and des- 
perate scale. This led to new and severe regulations and harsher ^j^j^^ ^.^^^j 
punishments, and thus the tyrannical interference in their pri- economic 
vate lives made multitudes in every country hate the tyranny ^" ^"^"^^ 
and long for its overthrow. Widespread economic suffering was the 
inevitable result of the Continental System and did more to make 
Napoleon's rule un- 
popular throughout 
Europe than did any- 
thing else except the 
enormous waste of 
life occasioned by the 
incessant warfare. 
That system, too, was 
the chief cause of the 
rupture of the alli- 
ance between Russia 
and France, in 18 12, 
a rupture which led 
to appalling disaster 
for Napoleon and was 
the beginning of the 
end. The whole stu- 
pendous superstruc- 
ture of Napoleonic 
statecraft and diplo- 
macy fell like a house 
of cards in the three 
years 1812, 1813, and 
1814. 




Pope Pius VII 

From an engraving by Oudaille, after the painting by 
David. 



THE FRANCO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE 

The Franco- Russian Alliance, concluded so hastily and un- 
expectedly at Tilsit in 1807, lasted nominally nearly five years. It 
was, however, unpopular from the beginning with certain influential 
classes in Russia and its inconveniences became increasingly apparent. 



292 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

The aristocracy of Russia, a powerful body, hated this alliance with 
a country which had abolished its own nobility, leaving its mem- 
bers impoverished by the loss of their lands and privileges, 
larityin There could be no sympathy between the Russian nobility, 

Russia based upon the grinding serfdom of the masses, and the 

country which had swept all traces of feudalism aside and proclaimed 
the equality of men. Moreover, the Russian nobility hated the 
Continental System, as it nearly destroyed the commerce with 
England in wheat, flax, and timber, which was the chief source of 
their wealth. Furthermore, the Czar Alexander I, having ob- 
between^ tained some of the advantages he had expected from his 
Napoleon and alliance, was irritated, now that he did not obtain others for 

Alexander I 

which he had hoped. He had gained Finland from Sweden 
and the Danubian Principalities from Turkey, but the vague though 
alluring prospect of a division of the Turkish Empire still remained 
unfulfilled and was, indeed, receding into the limbo of the unlikely. 
He wanted Constantinople, and Napoleon made it clear he could 
never have it. Moreover, Alexander was alarmed by Napoleon's 
schemes with the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, a state made out of the 
Polish provinces which had been acquired by Prussia and Austria. 
Alexander had no objection to Prussia and Austria losing their Polish 
provinces, but he himself had Polish provinces and he dreaded any- 
thing that looked like a resurrection of the former Kingdom of 
Poland, any appeal to the Polish national feeling. 

But the main cause of Alexander's gradual alienation from his ally 

was the Continental Blockade. This was working great financial loss 

The alliance to Russia. Moreover its inconveniences were coming home 

undermmed ^q \^[p^ jj^ Other ways. To enforce the system more com- 

by the Con- -^ ^ 

tinentai plctcly in Germany Napoleon seized in 1811 the Grand Duchy 

System q£ Oldenburg, which belonged to Alexander's brother-in-law. 

Thus the alliance was being subjected to a strain it could not stand. 

In 1812 it snapped, and loud was the report. Napoleon would not 

The Franco- allow any breach of the Continental Blockade if he could 

Russian prevent it. He resolved to force Russia, as he had forced the 

alliance 

breaks down rest of the Continent, to do his bidding. He demanded that she 

m 1812 jj^g yp ^Q Y\er promises and exclude British commerce. The 

answers were evasive, unsatisfactory, and in June, 1812, Napoleon 

crossed the Niemen with the largest army he ever commanded, over 

half a million men, the "army of twenty nations," as the Russians 



THE RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN 



293 



called it. About one-half were French. The rest were a motley 
host of Italians, Danes, Croatians, Dalmatians, Poles, Dutchmen, 
Westphalians, Saxons, Bavarians, Wiirtembergers, and still „ , 

f ' ' ' o ) Napoleon 

others. For the first time in his military career Napoleon com- invades 
manded the cooperation of Austria and Prussia, both of which "^^'* 
were compelled to send contingents. There were 100,000 cavalry 
and a numerous and powerful artillery. He had around him a bril- 
liant staff of officers, Murat, Ney, Eugene Beauharnais, and others. 
It seemed as if no power on earth could resist such an engine of 
destruction. Napoleon himself spoke of the expedition as the "last 
act" of the play. 

THE RETREAT FROM MOSCOW 

It was not quite that, but it was a supremely important act, one full 
of surprises. From the very start it was seen that in numbers there is 
sometimes weakness, not strength. This vast machine speedily com- 
menced to give way be- Disorgan- 

neath its own weight, i^ation in 

r^i ^ the com- 

The army had not ad- missary 
vanced five days before department 
the commissary department 
began to break down and 
bread was lacking. Horses, 
improperly nourished, died 
by the thousands, thus still 
further demoralizing the 
commissariat and imperiling 
the artillery. The Russians 
adopted the policy of not 
fighting but constantly re- 
treating, luring the 
enemy farther and 
farther into a country which they took the pains to devastate as ti^uaUy 

' retreat 

they retired, leaving no provisions or supplies for the invaders, 
no stations for the incapacitated, as they burned their villages on leav- 
ing them. Napoleon, seeking above everything a battle, in which he 
hoped to crush the enemy, was denied the opportunity. The 
Russians had studied the Duke of Wellington's methods in Portugal 
and profited by their study. It was 700 miles from the Niemen to 




Napoleon's Camp Bed 
Redrawn from a photograph. 



The Rus- 
sians con- 



294 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

Moscow. Napoleon had had no intention of going so far, but 
the tactics of his enemy forced him steadily to proceed. The Czar 
had announced that he would retire into Asia if necessary, rather than 
sign a peace with his enemy on the sacred soil of Russia. Napoleon 
hoped for a battle at Smolensk but only succeeded in getting a rear- 
guard action and a city in flames. 

This policy of continual retreat, so irritating to the French Em- 
peror, was equally irritating to the Russian people, who did not 
understand the reason and who clamored for a change. The Rus- 
sians therefore took up a strong position at Borodino on the route to 
Moscow. There a battle occurred on September 7, 18 12, between 

The battle the French army of 125,000 men and the Russian of 100,000. 

of Borodino ^he battle was one of the bloodiest of the whole epoch. The 
French lost 30,000, the Russians 40,000 men. Napoleon's victory 
was not overwhelming, probably because he could not bring himself 
to throw in the Old Guard. The Russians retreated in good order, 

Napoleon leaving the road open to Moscow, which city Napoleon 

enters entered September 14. The army had experienced terrible 

Moscow, 

September hardships all the way, first over roads soaked by constant 

14, 1812 rains, then later over roads intensely heated by July suns and 

giving forth suffocating clouds of dust. Terrible losses, thousands 

a day, had characterized the march of seven hundred miles from 

the Niemen to Moscow. 

Napoleon had resolved on the march to Moscow expecting that the 

Russians would consent to peace, once the ancient capital was in 

danger. But no one appeared for that purpose. He found Moscow 

The burning practically deserted, only 15,000 there, out of a population of 

of Moscow 250,000. Moreover the day after his entry fires broke out in 

various parts of the city, probably set by Russians. For four days 

the fearful conflagration raged, consuming a large part of the city. 

Still Napoleon stayed on, week after week, fearing the effect that the 

news of a retreat might produce, and hoping, against hope, that the 

Czar would sue for peace. Finally there was nothing to do, after 

wasting a month of precious time, but to order the retreat. This 

The retreat was a long-drawn-out agony, during which an army of 100,000 

from Moscow jnen was reduced to a few paltry thousands, fretted all along the 

route by which they had come by Russian armies and by Cossack 

guerrilla bands, horrified by the sigK"t of thousands of their comrades 

• still unburied on the battlefield of Borodino, suffering indescribable 



THE RETREAT FROM MOSCOW 



295 



hardships of hunger and exhaustion and finally caught in all the 
horrors of a fierce Russian winter, clad, as many of them were, lightly 
for a summer campaign. The scenes that accompanied this flight 
and rout were of unutterable woe, culminating in the hideous „. 

' ° The crossing 

tragedy of the crossing of the Beresina, the bridge breaking of the 
down under the wild confusion of men fighting to get across, ^''^sma 
horses frightened, the way blocked by carts and wagons, the pontoons 
raked by the fire of the Russian artillery. Thousands were left be- 
hind, many fell or threw themselves into the icy river and were 










Napoleon REXURNrNG to France, December, 181 2 
Redrawn from a sketch by Faber du Faur. 

Not made on the spot but probably presenting approximately the kind of equipage in 
which Napoleon traveled. He was accompanied by five other persons only. 



frozen to death. In the river, says one writer, when the Russians 
came up later they saw "awful heaps of drowned soldiers, women, 
and children, emerging above the surface of the waters, and here 
and there rigid in death like statues on their ice-bound horses." A 
few thousand out of all the army finally got out of Russia and across 
the Niemen. Many could only crawl to the hospitals asking for 
"the rooms where people die." History has few ghastlier pages in 
all its annals. Napoleon himself left the army in December, and 
traveled rapidly incognito to Paris, which he reached on the i8th. 



296 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

"I shall be back on the Niemen in the spring," was the state- 
„ , ment with which he tried to make men think that the lost 

Napoleon 

plans a new position would be soon recovered. 

campaign y^^ ^-^ ^^^ quite keep the promise. He did not get as far back 

again as the Niemen. But 1813 saw him battling for his supremacy 
in Germany, as 18 12 had seen him battling for it in Russia. The 
Russian disaster had sent a thrill of hope through the ranks of his 
enemies everywhere. The colossus might be, indeed appeared to be, 
falling. Had not the auspicious moment arrived for annihilating 
him ? Particularly violent was the hatred of the Prussians, who had, 
more than other peoples, felt the ruthlessness of his tyranny for the 
last six years. They trembled with eagerness to be let loose and 
when their King made a treaty of alliance with Russia and subse- 

_. ... quently made a more direct and personal appeal to his people 

Prussia joins ~i J tr r-r- r- r- 

Russia than any Prussian monarch had ever made before, they re- 

N^pofeon sponded enthusiastically. There was a significant feature 

(February, about this Treaty of Kalisch (ka'-lish) with Russia. Russia 

'^ was not to lay down her arms against Napoleon until Prussia 

had recovered an area equal to that which she had possessed before 

the battle of Jena. ,But the area was not to be the same, for Russia 

was to keep Prussia's Polish provinces, now included in the Grand 

Duchy of Warsaw, whose doom was decreed. Prussia should have 

compensation in northern Germany. 

Could Napoleon rely on the Confederation of the Rhine and on his 

ally Austria ? That remained to be seen. A reverse would almost 

-T , . surely cost him the support of the former and the neutrality of 

Napoleon s -^ '^^'^ ■' 

doubtful the latter. Their loyalty would be proportioned to his success. 

* '^^ There was with them not the same popular wrath as with the 

Prussians. On the other hand, their princes had a keen eye for the 

main chance. Austria surely would use Napoleon's necessities 

for her own advantage. The princes of the Rhenish Confederation 

wished to retain the advantages they had won largely through their 

complaisant cooperation with Napoleon during recent years. Austria 

wished to recover advantages she had lost, territory, prestige, badly 

tattered and torn by four unsuccessful campaigns. 

The cam Napoleon, working feverishly since the return from Russia, 

paign of i8i3 finally got an army of over 200,000 men together. But to do 

in ermany ^j^-^ -^^ j^^^ ^^ draw upon the youth of France, as never before, 

calling out recruits a year before their time for service was due, A 



NAPOLEON LOSES GERMANY 297- 

large part of them were untrained, and had to get their training on 
the march into Germany. The army was weak in cavalry, a decisive 
instrument in following up a victory and clinching it. 



DECISIVE "BATTLE OF THE NATIONS" AT LEIPSIC 

Napoleon was back in central Germany before the Russians and 
Prussians were fully prepared. He defeated them at Liitzen and at 
Bautzen in May, 181 3, but was unable to follow up his victories 
because of the lack of sufficient cavalry, and the campaign convinced 
him that he could accomplish nothing decisive without reen- 
forcements. He therefore agreed, in an unlucky moment, as it arm^sdce in 
later proved, to a six weeks' armistice. During that time he mid-cam- 
did get large reenforcements but his enemies got larger. And ^^*^° 
during that interval the diplomatic intriguing went against him so 
that when the armistice was over Austria had joined the alliance of 
Russia, Prussia, and England, against him. He defeated 
the Austrians at Dresden (August 26-27), his last great fh"e'amanc^^ 
victory. His subordinates were, however, beaten in various against 
subsidiary engagements and he was driven back upon Leipsic. ^^^ ^°° 
There occurred a decisive three days' battle, the "Battle of the 
Nations," as the Germans call it (October 16-18). In point of 
numbers involved this was the greatest battle of the Napoleonic era. 
Over half a million men took part, at most 200,000 under ^^ 

XT 1 11 1 r , ,,. The crash of 

JNapoieon, 300,000 under the commanders of the alhes. Na- the Napo- 
poleon was disastrously defeated and was sent flying back '^°"'*^ system 
across the Rhine with only a small remnant of his army. The 
whole political structure which he had built up in Germany collapsed. 
The members of the Confederation of the Rhine deserted the falling 
star, and entered the alliance against him, on the guarantee of their 
possessions by the allies. Jerome fled from Westphalia and his 
brief kingdom disappeared. Meanwhile Wellington, who for years 
had been aiding the Spaniards, had been successful and was crossing 
the Pyrenees into southern France. The coils were closing in upon 
the lion, who now stood at bay. 

The allies moved on after the retreating French toward the Rhine. 
It had been no part of their original purpose to demand to yield, or 
Napoleon's abdication. They now, in November, 1813, offered °°* *° yield? 
him peace on the basis of the natural frontiers of France, the Rhine- 



298 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

the Alps, and the Pyrenees. He would not accept but procrastinated, 
and made counter-propositions. .Even in February, 1814, he could 
have retained ■ his throne and the historic boundaries of the old 
Bourbon monarchy, had he been willing to renounce the rest. He 
dallied with the suggestion, secretly hoping for some turn in luck 
that would spring the coalition apart and enable him to recover the 
ground he had lost. In thus refusing to recognize defeat, refusing to 




Napoleon's War Horse, "Marengo" 

accept an altered situation, he did great harm to France and completed 
his own downfall. His stiff, uncompromising, unyielding temper 
sealed his doom. He was no longer acting as the wise statesman, re- 
sponsible for the welfare of a great people who, by their unstinted 
sacrifices, had put him under heavy obligations. His was the spirit of 
the gambler, thinking to win all by a happy turn of the cards. He 
was also will incarnate. With will and luck all might yet be retrieved. 



THE ALLIES ENTER PARIS (MARCH 31, 1814) 

Napoleon had said on leaving Germany, "I shall be back in May 
with 250,000 men." He did not expect a winter campaign and he felt 
confident that by May he could have another army. The allies, how- 



ABDICATION OF NAPOLEON 299 

ever, did not wait for May but at the close of December, 1813, 
streamed across the Rhine and invaded France from various direc- 
tions. France, victorious for eighteen years, now experienced „. 
what she had so often administered to others. The campaign paign in 
was brief, only two months, Februarj^ and March, 1814. ^'■^"'^^ (' '4) 
Napoleon was hopelessly outnumbered. Yet this has been called the 
most brilliant of his campaigns. Fighting on the defensive and on 
inner lines, he showed marvelous mastery of the art of war, striking 
here, striking there, with great precision and swiftness, undaunted, 
resourceful, tireless. The allies needed every bit of their over- 
whelming superiority in numbers to compass the end of their re- 
doubtable antagonist, with his back against the wall and his brain 
working with matchless lucidity and with lightning-like rapidity. 
They thought they could get to his capital in a week. It took them 
two months. However, there could be but one end to such a cam- 
paign, if the allies held together, as they did. On the 30th of March 
Paris capitulated and on the following day the Czar Alexander and 
Frederick William III, the King of Prussia, made their formal entry 
into the city which the Duke of Brunswick twenty-two years before 
had threatened with destruction if it laid sacrilegious hands upon 
the King or Queen. Since that day much water had flowed under 
the bridge, and France and Europe had had a strange, eventful 
history, signifying much. 

The victors would not longer tolerate Napoleon. He was forced to 
abdicate unconditionally. He was allowed to retain his title of 
Emperor but henceforth he was to rule only over Elba, an " Emperor of 
island nineteen miles long and six miles wide, lying off the ^^^^ " 
coast of Tuscany whence his Italian ancestors had sailed for Corsica 
two centuries and a half before he was born. Thither he repaired, 
having said farewell to the Old Guard in the courtyard of the palace 
of Fontainebleau (fori-tan-blo'), kissing the flag of France made 
lustrous on a hundred fields. "Nothing but sobbing was heard in 
all the ranks," wrote one of the soldiers who saw the scene, "and I can 
say that I too shed tears when I saw my Emperor depart." 

LOUIS XVIII BECOMES KING OF FRANCE 

On the day that Napoleon abdicated, the Senate, so-called guardian 
of the constitution, obsequious and servile to the Emperor in his days 
of fortune, turned to salute the rising sun, and in solemn session 



300 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

proclaimed Louis XVIII King of France. The allies, who had 
conquered Napoleon and banished him to a petty island in the 
Mediterranean, thought they were done with him for good and all. 
But from this complacent self-assurance they were destined to a rude 
awakening. Their own errors and wranglings at the Congress of 
Vienna, whither they repaired in September, 1814, to divide the 
spoils and determine the future organization of Europe, and the mis- 
takes and indiscretions of the Bourbons whom they restored to rule in 
France, gave Napoleon the opportimity for the most audacious and 
wonderful adventure of his life. 

Louis XVIII, the new king, tried to adapt himself to the greatly 
altered circumstances of the country to which he now returned in the 
wake of foreign armies after an absence of twenty-two 5'ears. He saw 
that he could not be an absolute king as his ancestors had been, and he 
therefore granted a charter to the French, giving them a legislature 
and guaranteeing certain rights which they had won and which he 
saw could not safely be withdrawn. His regime assured much 
larger liberty than France had ever experienced under Napoleon. 
Nevertheless certain attitudes of his and ways of speaking, and the 
actions of the royalists who surrounded him, and several unwise 
measures of government, soon rendered him unpopular and irritated 
and alarmed the people. He spoke of himself as King by the grace 
The mis ^^ ^^^' t^^?> denying the sovereignty of the people ; he dated 

takes of the his first document, the Constitutional Charter, from "the 
our ons nineteenth year of my reign," as if there had never been a 
Republic and a Napoleonic Empire ; he restored the white flag and 
banished the glorious tricolor which had been carried in triumph 
throughout Europe. What was much more serious, he offended 
thousands of Napoleon's army officers by retiring or putting them 
on half pay, many thus being reduced to destitution, and all feeling 
themselves dishonored. Moreover, many former nobles who had 
early in the Revolution emigrated from France and then fought 
against her received honors and distinctions. Then, in addition, the 
Roman Catholic clergy and the nobles of the court talked loudly and 
unwisely about getting back their lands which had been confiscated 
and sold to the peasants, although both the Concordat of 1802 
and the Charter of 18 14 distinctly recognized and ratified these 
changes and promised that they should not be disturbed. The 
peasants were far and away the most numerous class in France and 



THE RETURN FROM ELBA 301 

they were thus early alienated from the Bourbons by these threats 
at their most vital interest, their property rights, which Napoleon 
had always stoutly maintained. Thus a few months after ^^^ 
Napoleon's abdication the evils of his reign were forgotten, peasantry 
the terrible cost in human life, the burdensome taxation, ^^'^^^ 
the tyranny of it all, and he was looked upon as a friend, as a hero 
to whom the soldiers had owed glory and repute and the peasants 
the secure possession of their farms. In this way a mental atmos- 
phere hostile to Louis XVIII, and favorable to Napoleon, was created 
by a few months of Bourbon rule. 

Napoleon, penned up in his little island, took note of all this. He 
also heard of the serious dissensions of the allies now that they were 
trying to divide the spoils at Vienna, of their jealousies and 

,.,.-. „ 1 . , Dissension 

animosities, which, in January, 1815, rose to such a pitch among the 
that Austria, France, and England prepared to go to war with ^}^^^ ^* 
Prussia and Russia over the allotment of the booty. He also 
knew that they were intriguing at the Congress for his banishment 
to some place remote from Europe. 



NAPOLEON'S RETURN FROM ELBA 

For ten months he had been in his miniature kingdom. The 
psychological moment had come for the most dramatic action of 
his life. Leaving the island with twelve hundred guards, „ 

» » ' Napoleon 

and escaping the vigilance of the British cruisers, he landed resolves to 
at Cannes (k&n) on March i. That night he started on the ^^ ^^^"^ 
march to Paris and on March 20 entered the Tuileries, ruler of France 
once more. The return from Elba will always remain one of the 
most romantic episodes of histor^^ With a force so small that it could 
easily have been taken prisoner, Napoleon had no alternative and no 
other wish than to appeal directly to the confidence of the people. 
Never was there such a magnificent response. All along the route 
the peasants received him enthusiastically. But his appeal was 
particularly to the army, to which he issued one of his stirring bulle- 
tins. "Soldiers," it began, "we have not been conquered. We 
were betrayed. Soldiers ! Come and range yourselves under the 
banner of your chief : his existence depends wholly on yours : his 
interests, his honor, and his glory are your interests, your honor, your 
glor^^ Come ! Victory will march at double quick. The eagle 



302 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 



with the national colors shall fly from steeple to steeple to the towers 
of Notre Dame. Then you will be able to show your scars with 
honor : then you will be able to boast of what you have done : you 
will be the liberators of your country." 

Regiment after regiment went over to him. The royalists thought 

he would be arrested at Grenoble where there was a detachment of the 

army under a royalist commander. Napoleon went straight 

flock to up to them, threw open his gray coat and said, "Here I am : 

Napoleon's y^^ know me. 

standard 

If there is a 
soldier among you 
who wishes to shoot 
his Emperor, let him 
do it." The soldiers 
flocked over to him, 
tearing off the white 
cockades and putting 
on the tricolor, which 
they had secretly 
carried in their knap- 
sacks. Opposition 
melted away all along 
the route. 1 1 became 
a triumphant pro- 
cession. When lies 
would help. Napoleon 
told them — among 
others that it was 
not ambition that 
brought him back, 
that "the forty-five best heads of the government of Paris have 
called me from Elba and my return is supported by the three first 
powers of Europe." He admitted that he had made mistakes and 
Napoleon assured the people that henceforth he desired only to follow 

TuUeries^ ^^^ ^^^^^ °^ P^^*^^ ^^^ liberty. He had come back to protect 
(March 20, the threatened blessings of the Revolution. The last part of 
this intoxicating journey he made in a carriage attended by 
only half a dozen Polish lancers. On March 20, Louis XVIII fled 
from the Tuileries. That evening Napoleon entered it. 




After the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence. 



1815) 



THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO 



303 



. "What was the happiest period of your Ufe as Emperor?" some 
one asked him at St. Helena. "The march from Cannes to Paris," 
was the quick reply. 

DEFEAT AT WATERLOO 

His happiness was limited to less than the "Hundred Days" 
which this period of his reign is called. Attempting to reassure The " Hun- 
France and Europe, he met from the former, tired of war, only ^'^^^ ^^y^ " 

half-hearted support, from the 
allies only remorseless opposi- 
tion. When the diplomats at 
the Congress of Vienna heard 
of his escape from Elba they 
immediately ceased their con- 
tentions and banded them- 
selves together against "this 
disturber of the peace of 
Europe." They declared him 
an outlaw and set their armies 
in motion. He saw that he 
must fight to maintain him- 
self. He resolved to attack 
before his enemies had „. 

Ine cam- 
time to effect their paign in 

union. The battlefield ^^^^'"^ 
was in' Belgium, as Welling- 
ton with an army of English, 
Dutch, Belgians, and Ger- 
mans, and, at some distance 
from them, Bliicher (bluch'-er) 
with a large army of Prus- 
sians, were there. If Napoleon could prevent their union, then by 
defeating each separately, he would be in a stronger position when the 
Russian and Austrian armies came on. Perhaps, indeed, they would 
think it wiser not to come on at all but to conclude peace. In Bel- 
gium consequently occurred a four days' campaign culminating on 
the famous field of Waterloo, twelve miles south of Brussels. The battle 
There, on a hot Sunday in June, Napoleon was disastrously of Waterloo 
defeated (June 18, 1815). The sun of Austerlitz set forever. The 




BlL'CHER 

After a miniature by Miiller. 



304 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 




NAPOLEON'S FLIGHT 305 

battle began at half past eleven in the morning, was characterized 
by prodigies of valor, by tremendous charges of cavalry and infantry 
back and forth over a sodden lield. Wellington held his position 
hour after hour as wave after wave of French troops rushed up the 
hill, foaming in and about the solid unflinching British squares, then, 
unable to break them, foamed back again. Wellington held on, 
hoping, looking, for the Prussians under Bliicher, who, at the begin- 
ning of the battle, were eleven miles away. They had promised to 
join him, if he accepted battle there, and late in the afternoon they 
kept the promise. Their arrival was decisive, as Napoleon was now 




LoNGwooD, Napoleon's House at St. Helena 

greatly outnumbered. In the early evening, as the sun was setting, 
the last charge of the French was repulsed. Repulse soon turned 
into a rout and the demoralized army streamed from the field in utter 
panic, fiercely pursued by the Prussians. The Emperor, seeing the 
utter annihilation of his army, sought death, but sought in vain. 
" I ought to have died at Waterloo," he said later, "but the misfor- 
tune is that when a man seeks death most he cannot find it. Men 
were killed around me, before, behind — everywhere. But there was 
no bullet for me." He fled to Paris, then toward the west coast 
of France hoping to escape to the United States, but the English 
cruisers off the shore rendered that impossible. Making the best 
of necessity he threw himself upon the generosity of the British. 
"I have come," he announced, "like Themistocles, to seek the 



Napoleon 
banished to 
St. Helena 



306 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON 

hospitality of the British nation." Instead of receiving it, how- 
ever, he was sent to a rock in the South Atlantic, the island of 
St. Helena, where he was kept under a petty and ignoble sur- 
veillance. Six years later he died of cancer of the stomach 
at the age of fifty-two, leaving an extraordinary legend be- 
hind him to disturb the future. He was buried under a slab 
that bore neither name nor date and it was twenty years before he was 




Napoleon's Tomb in the Invalides, Paris 

borne to his final resting-place under the dome of the Invalides in 
Paris, although in his last will and testament he had said : "My wish 
is to be buried on the banks of the Seine in the midst of the French 
people whom I have loved so well." 



REFERENCES 

The Regeneration of Prussia : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, Chap. 
VII; Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 270-286; Rose, T^e 
Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era, pp. 184-193; Marriott and Robertson, The 
Evolution of Prussia, Chap. VII, pp. 225-239; Schevill, The Making of Modern 
Germany, pp. 76-82; Prie§t, Germany Since 1740, pp. 55-65. 



REFERENCES 



307 



The Russian Campaign: Fisher, Napoleon, pp. 189-201; Ropes, The First 
Napoleon, pp. 158-195; Johnston, Napoleon, pp. 174-187; FouinieT, Napoleon 
I, Chap. XVII, pp. 536-579- 

The Campaign in Germany, 1813: Fisher, pp. 201-212; Johnston, pp. 
189-197; Ropes, pp. 195-217; Fournier, Chap. XVIII, pp. 580-642; Rose, 
Life of Napoleon I, Vol. II, Chap. XXXV, pp. 303-338. 

The Campaign in France, 1814: Johnston, pp. 198-209; Fournier, Chap. 
XIX, pp. 643-680. 

The First Restoration and Elba: Johnston, Chap. XVI, pp. 210-221; 
Fournier, pp. 680-693 J Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, Chap. XVIII, pp, 

555-575- 

Waterloo: Fisher, pp. 217-242; Johnston, pp. 222-237; Ropes, pp. 242- 
295; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 417-471 ; Victor Hugo, Les Miserables, Part II, Book 
I ; Encyclo prndia Britannica, Article, Waterloo Campaign. 

Napoleon at St. Helena : Fournier, Chap. XXI, pp. 721-743; Rosebery, 
Napoleon, the Last Phase, Chaps. IV-VII, XII-XVI ; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. IX, Chap. XXIV, pp. 756-771- 




Tomb of N.\poleon at St. Helena 



CHAPTER XIV 

THE CONGRESSES 

THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA — A NEW MAP OF EUROPE 

The overthrow of Napoleon brought with it one of the most com- 
plicated and difficult problems ever presented to statesmen and 
the diplomatists. As all the nations of Europe had been pro- 
overthrow of foundly affected by his enterprises, so all were profoundly 
Napoleon affected by his fall. The destruction of the Napoleonic 
regime must be followed by the reconstruction of Europe. 

This work of reconstruction was undertaken by the Congress of 
Vienna, one of the most important diplomatic gatherings in the 
history of Europe (September, 1814-June, 1815). Never be- 
assembiage fore had there been seen such an assemblage of celebrities, 
lenna "The city of Vienna," wrote one of. the participants, "presents 
at this moment an overwhelming spectacle ; all the most illustrious 
personages in Europe are represented here in the most exalted 
fashion." There were the emperors of Austria and Russia, the 
kings of Prussia, Bavaria, Wiirtemberg, Denmark, a multitude of 
lesser princes, and all the diplomats of Europe, of whom Metternich 
and Talleyrand were the most conspicuous. All the powers were 
represented except Turkey. There were representatives of the great 
European banking houses too, "money-changers," Wellington called 
them, and a multitude of adventurers and hangers-on of every stripe. 
The main work of the Congress was the distribution of the terri- 
tories that France had been forced to relinquish. Certain arrange- 
The work of ments had been agreed upon by the allies before going to 
the Congress Vienna, in the First Treaty of Paris, May 30, 1814, and 
needed now but to be carried out. The King of Piedmont, a refugee 
in his island of Sardinia during Napoleon's reign, was restored to 
his throne, and Genoa was given him that thus the state which 
bordered France on the southeast might be the stronger to resist 

308 



THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA 



309 




310 THE CONGRESSES 

French aggression. Belgium, previously an Austrian possession, 
was annexed to Holland and to the House of Orange, now restored, 
that this state might be a barrier in the north. It was understood 
Principle of that, in general, the doctrine of legitimacy should be followed 
legitimacy j^ determining the rearrangement of Europe, that is, the 
principle that princes deprived of their thrones and driven from their 
states by Napoleon should receive them back again at the hands of 
collective Europe, though this principle was ignored whenever it so 
suited the interests of the Great Powers. 

The allies, who had, after immense effort and sacrifice, overthrown 
Napoleon, felt that they should have their reward. The most 
Demands of powcrful monarch at Vienna was Alexander I, Emperor of 
Russia Russia, who, ever since Napoleon's disastrous invasion of 

Russia, had loomed large as a liberator of Europe. He now de- 
manded that the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, whose government fell 
with Napoleon, be given to him. This state had been created out of 
Polish territories which Prussia and Austria had seized in the parti- 
tions of that country at the close of the eighteenth century. Alex- 
ander wished to unite them with a part of Poland that had fallen 
to Russia, thus largely to restore the old Polish kingdom and nation- 
ality, to which he intended to give a parliament and a constitution. 
There was to be no incorporation of the restored kingdom in Russia, 
but the Russian Emperor was to be King of Poland. The union was 
to be merely personal. , 

Prussia was willing to give up her Polish provinces if only she could 
be indemnified elsewhere. She therefore fixed her attention upon the 
Demands rich Kingdom of Saxony to the south, with the important 
of Prussia cities of Dresden and Leipsic, as her compensation. To be 
sure there was a King of Saxony, and the doctrine of legitimacy would 
seem clearly to apply to him. But he had been faithful to his treaty 
obligations with Napoleon down to the battle of Leipsic, and thus, 
said Prussia, he had been a traitor to Germany, and his state was 
lawful prize. , 

Russia and Prussia supported each other's claims, but Austria and 
England and France opposed them stoutly, in the end even agreeing 
to go to war to prevent this aggrandizement of the two northern 
nations. It was this dissension among those who had conquered 
him that caused Napoleon to think that the opportunity was favor- 
able for his return from Elba. But, however jealous the allies were 



THE WORK OF THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA 311 V 

of each other, they, one and all, hated Napoleon and were firmly 
resolved to be rid of him. They had no desire for more war and 
consequently quickly compromised their differences. The final 
decision was that Russia should receive the lion's share of the Duchy 
of Warsaw, Prussia retaining only the province of Posen, and Cracow 
being erected into a free city ; that the King of Saxony should be 
restored to his throne ; that he should retain the important cities of 
Dresden and Leipsic, but should cede to Prussia about two-fifths 
of his kingdom ; that, as further compensation, Prussia should re- 
ceive extensive territories on both banks of the Rhine. Prussia also 
acquired Pomerania from Sweden, thus rounding out her coast line 
on the Baltic. 

Russia emerged from the Congress with a goodly number cf addi- 
tions. She retained Finland, conquered from Sweden during the late 
wars, and Bessarabia, wrestM from the Turks ; also Turk- Russian ac- 
ish territories in the southeast. But, most important of all, quisitions 
she had now succeeded in gaining most of the Grand Duchy of 
Warsaw. Russia now extended farther westward into Europe than 
ever, and could henceforth speak with greater weight in European 
affairs. 

Austria recovered her Polish possessions and received, as compensa- 
tion for the Netherlands, northern Italy, to be henceforth known as 
the Lombardo- Venetian Kingdom, comprising the larger and Austrian ac- 1 
richer p^rt of the Po valley. She also recovered the Illyrian quisitions 
provinces along the eastern coast of the Adriatic. Thus, after 
twenty years of war, almost uninterruptedly disastrous, she emerged 
with considerable accessions of strength, and with a population larger 
by four or five millions than she had possessed in 1792. She had ob- 
tained, in lieu of remote and unprofitable possessions, territories " 
which augmented her power in central Europe, the immediate an- 
nexation of a part of Italy, and indirect control over the other Italian 
states. 

England, the most persistent enemy of Napoleon, the builder of 
repeated coalitions, the pay-mistress of the allies for many years, 
found her compensation in additions to her colonial empire. English ac- 
She retained much that she had conquered from France or quisitions 
from the allies or dependencies of France, particularly Holland. She 
occupied Helgoland in the North Sea ; Malta and the Ionian Islands in 
the Mediterranean ; Cape Colony in South Africa ; Ceylon, and other 



312 THE CONGRESSES 

islands. It was partially in view of her colonial losses that Holland 
was indemnified by the annexation of Belgium, as has been already 
stated. 

Another question of great importance, decided at Vienna, was the 
disposition of Italy. The general principle of action had already been 
The future agreed upon, that Austria should receive compensation here 
of Italy fQj- the Netherlands, and that the old dynasties should be 

restored. Austrian interests determined the territorial arrange- 
ments. Austria took possession, as has been said, of the richest and, 
in a military sense, the strongest provinces, Lombardy and Venetia, 
from which position she could easily dominate the peninsula, espe- 
cially as the Duchy of Parma was given to Marie Louise, wife of Na- 
poleon, and as princes connected with the Austrian imperial family 
were restored to their thrones in Modena and Tuscany. The Papal 
States were also reestablished. 

No union or federation of these states was effected. It was Met- 
ternich's desire that Italy should simply be a collection of independ- 
ent states, should be only a "geographical expression." The 
" geograph- doctrine of legitimacy, appealed to for the restoration of 
icai expres- dynasties, was ignored by this congress of princes in the 
case of republics. "Republics are no longer fashionable," 
said the Czar to a Genoese deputation which came to protest against 
this arrangement. Genoa and Venice were handed over to others. 
Romilly mentioned in the English House of Commons that the Corin- 
thian horses which Napoleon had brought from St. Mark's to Paris 
were restored to the Venetians, but that it was certainly a strange 
act of justice "to give them back their statues, but not to restore to 
them those far more valuable possessions, their territory and their 
'republic," which had been wrested from them at the same time. 

Other changes in the map of Europe, now made or ratified, were 
these : Norway was taken from Denmark and joined with Sweden ; 
Switzerland was increased by the addition of three cantons which had 
recently been incorporated in France, thus making twenty-two can- 
tons in all. The frontiers of Spain and Portugal were left untouched. 
Such were the territorial readjustments decreed by the Congress 
of Vienna, which were destined to endure, with slight changes, for 
Criticism of nearly fifty years. It is impossible to discover in these nego- 
the Congress tiations the operation of any lofty principle. Self-interest is 
the key to this welter of bargains and agreements. Not that these 



ST. HELENA 



313 




Napoleon EmbarkiiNG on the "Bellerophon" 
Designed and engraved by Baugeau. 




The Island of St. Helena 
After the drawing by F. Clementson. 



314 THE CONGRESSES 

titled brokers neglected to attempt to convince Europe of the nobility 
of their endeavors. Great phrases, such as "the reconstruction of 
the social order," "the regeneration of the political system of Eu- 
rope," a "durable peace based upon a just division of power" were 
used by the diplomats of Vienna in order to impress the peoples of 
Europe, and to lend an air of dignity and elevation to their august 
assemblage, but the peoples were not deceived. They witnessed 
the unedifying scramble of the conquerors for the spoils of victory. 
They saw the monarchs of Europe, who for years had been de- 
nouncing Napoleon for not respecting the rights of peoples, acting 
precisely in the same way, whenever it suited their pleasure. 

The Congress of Vienna was a congress of aristocrats, to whom the 

ideas of nationality and democracy as proclaimed by the French 

Ch t of Revolution were incomprehensible or loathsome. The rulers 

the Congress rearranged Europe according to their own desires, disposing 

of it as if it were their own personal property, ignoring the 

sentiment of nationality, which had lately been so wonderfully 

aroused, indifferent to the wishes of the people. The people were 

treated as children incapable of thought in such high matters as 

their own destiny, with no right, because of their inexperience and 

immaturity, to be heard. The world was to be held in tutelage as 

The principle '^^^ays hitherto by men who considered themselves appointed 

of national- to that end, the anointed of the Lord. They did not strive so to 

ity Ignored ^raw the boundaries of the different states as to satisfy the 

aspirations of the various peoples and thus to lay the foundations 

of a permanent peace. They aimed rather in their adjustments 

to create a so-called "balance of power." Theirs could be no 

"settlement" because they ignored the factors that alone would 

make the settlement permanent. The history of Europe from 1 8 1 5 

to the present day has been the attempt to undo this cardinal 

error of the Congress of Vienna. 

THE HOLY ALLIANCE 

In addition to the Treaties of Vienna the allies signed in 1 8 1 5 two 

other documents of great significance in the future history of Europe, 

that establishing the so-called Holy Alliance, and that establishing 

the Quadruple Alliance. The former proceeded from the initiative 

. of Alexander I, of Russia, whose mood was now deeply religious 




West Ion gitrnle Oreenwich, HeislLpnffitiuie 



T 2 



THE HOLY ALLIANCE 315 

under the influence of the tremendous events of recent years and the 
fall of Napoleon, which to his mind seemed the swift verdict of a 
higher power in human destinies. He himself had been freely praised 
as the White Angel, in contrast to the fallen Black Angel, and he 
had been called the Universal Savior. He now submitted a docu- 
ment to his immediate allies, Prussia and Austria, which was famous 
for a generation, and which gave the popular name to the system 
of repression which was for many years followed by the powers that 
had conquered in the late campaign. The document stated that it 
was the intention of the powers henceforth to be guided, in both their 
domestic and foreign policies, solely by the precepts of the Christian 
religion. The rulers announced that they would regard each other 
as brothers and their subjects as their children, and they promised 
to aid each other on all occasions and in all places. All those powers 
which might wish to make avowal of these "sacred principles shall be 
received into the Holy Alliance with as much cordiality as affection." 
The other powers, thus asked by the Emperor of Russia to express 
their approval of Christian principles, did so, preserving what dig- 
nity tiiey could in playing what most of them considered a farce of 
questionable taste. For, knowing the principles that had actually 
governed the Czar and the other rulers at the Congress of Vienna, 
they did not consider them particularly biblical or as likely to 
inaugurate a new and idyllic diplomacy in Europe. As a matter 
of fact no state ever made any attempt to act in accordance with 
the principles so highly approved. The only important thing about 
the Holy Alliance was its name, which was, in the opinion of all 
Liberals, too good to be lost, so ironically did it contrast with what 
was known of the characters and policies of the rulers of Russia, 
Prussia, and Austria, the " Holy Allies." 

THE QUADRUPLE ALLL\NCE AND METTERNTCH 

^ The other document, signed November 20, 1815, by Russia, Prussia, 
Austria, and England, established a Quadruple Alliance providing 
that these powers should hold congresses from time to time for 
the purpose of considering their common interests and the needs 
of Europe. The congresses that were held during the next few 
years in accordance with this agreement were converted into engines 
of oppression everywhere largely through the influence of Prince 



3i6 



THE CONGRESSES 



Metternich, Chancellor of the Austrian Empire, whose influence 
upon their deliberations was decisive. 

Metternich appeared to the generation that lived between 1815 and 
1848 as the most commanding personality of Europe, whose impor- 

Metternich, tance is shown 

1773-1859 in the phrases, 
"Era of Metternich," 
"System of Metter- 
nich." He was the 
central figure not only 
in Austrian and Ger- 
man politics, but in 
European diplomacy. 
He was the most 
famous statesman 
Austria produced in 
the nineteenth cen- 
tury. A man of high 
rank, wealthy, pol- 
ished, blending social 
accomplishments 
with literary and 
scientific pretensions, 
his foible was omnis- 
cience. He was the 
prince of diploma- 
tists, thoroughly at 
ease amid all the in- 
triguing of European 
politics. His egotism 
was Olympian. He 

His spoke of him- 

self-esteem ggjf ^^ being 

born "to prop up the decaying structure" of European society. He 
felt the world resting on his shoulders. "My position has this 
peculiarity," he says, "that all eyes, all expectations are directed to 
precisely that point where I happen to be." He asks the question : 
"Why, among so many million men, must I be the one to think 
when others do not think, to act when others do not act, and to 




Metternich 
After the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence. 



METTERNICH'S OPINIONS 317 

write because others know not how?" He himself admitted at the 
end of a long career that he had "never strayed from the path of 
eternal law," that his mind had "never entertained error." He 
felt and said that he would leave a void when he disappeared. 

On analysis, however, his thinking appears singularly negative. It 
consisted of his execration of the French Revolution. His lifelong 
role was that of incessant opposition to everything compre- „ ... 
hended in the word. He denounced it in rabid and lurid historical 
phrases. It was "the disease which must be cured, the vol- '™P°''t*°"=* 
cano which must be extinguished, the gangrene which must be burned 
out with the hot iron, the hydra with jaws open to swallow up the 
social order." He believed in absolute monarchy, and considered 
himself "God's lieutenant" in supporting it. He hated parliaments 
and representative systems of government. All this talk of liberty, 
equality, constitutions, he regarded as pestilential, the odious chatter 
of revolutionary French minds. He defined himself as a man of the 
status quo. Keep things just as they are, all innovation is mad- 
ness, such was the constant burden of his song. He was the con- 
vinced and resourceful opponent of all struggles for national inde- 
pendence, of all aspirations for self-government. Democracy could 
only "change daylight into darkest night." 

Napoleon once said of Metternich that "he mistook intrigue for 
statesmanship." The acuteness of this characterization will be seen 
as we watch him at work upon his "system" in Austria, Germany, 
Ital}', and Spain in the decade following the overthrow of the French 
Emperor. 

REACTION IN EUROPE AFTER 181 5 



"The battle of Waterloo," remarked Napoleon at St. Helena, "will 
be as dangerous to the liberties of Europe as the battle of Philippi was 
dangerous to the liberties of Rome." Napoleon was not exactly 
an authority on liberty, but he did know the difference between en- 
lightened despotism and unenlightened. His was, in the main, 
of the former sort. The kind that succeeded his in central 
Europe could not be so characterized. The style was set by unity in the 
Austria, the leading state on the Continent from 18 15 to 1848. Austrian 
Austria was not a single nation, like France, but was composed 
of many races. To the west were the Austrian duchies, chiefly 



3i8 



THE CONGRESSES 




THE METTERNICH SYSTEM 319 

German, the ancient possessions of the House of Hapsburg ; to the 
north Bohemia, an ancient kingdom acquired by the Hapsburgs in 
1526 ; to the east the Kingdom of Hungary, occupying the immense 
plain of the middle Danube ; to the south the Kingdom of Lombardy- 
Venetia, purely Italian. The two leading races in this Austrian 
Empire were the Germans, forming the body of the population in 
the duchies, and the Magyars (mo'-dyorz), originally an Asiatic folk, 
encamped in the Danube valley since the ninth centur}' and forming 
the dominant people in Hungary. There were many branches of 
the Slavic race in both Austria and Hungary. There were also 
Roumanians, a different people still, in eastern Hungary. 

To rule so conglomerate a realm of twenty-eight or twenty-nine 
million people was a difficult task. This was the first problem 
of Francis I (i 792-1 835) and Metternich. Their policy was to resist 
all demands for reform, and to keep things as they were, to make 
the world stand still. The people were sharply divided into classes, 
each resting on a different basis. Of these the nobility oc- . . . 

'^ •' Austria a 

cupied a highly privileged position. They enjoyed freedom land of the 
from compulsory military service, large exemptions from egime 

taxation, a monopoly of the best offices in the state. They pos- 
sessed a large part of the land, from which in man}^ cases they drew 
enormous revenues. On the other hand, the condition of the peas- 
ants, who formed the immense mass of the people, was deplorable 
in the extreme. They were even refused the right to purchase relief 
from the heaviest burdens. Absolutism in government, feudalism in 
society, special privileges for the favored few, oppression and misery 
for the masses, such was the condition of Austria in 181 5. 

It was the fixed purpose of the government to maintain things as 
they were and it succeeded largely for thirty-three years, during the 
reign of Francis I, till 1835, and of his successor Ferdinand I (1835- 
1848). During all this period Metternich was the chief min- The police 
ister. His system, at war with human nature, at war with the system 
modern spirit, rested upon a meddlesome police, upon elaborate espio- 
nage, upon a vigilant censorship of ideas. Censorship was applied to 
theaters, newspapers, books. The frontiers were guarded that for- 
eign books of a liberal character might not slip in to corrupt. Politi- 
cal science and history practically disappeared as serious studies. 
Spies were everywhere, in government offices, in places of amusement, 
in educational institutions. Particularly did this government fear 



320 THE CONGRESSES 

the universities, because it feared ideas. Professors and students 

were subjected to humiliating regulations. Spies attended lectures. 

The government insisted on having a complete list of the books that 

each professor took out of the university library. Text-books were 

prescribed. Students might not study abroad, nor might they have 

societies of their own. Austrians might not travel to foreign countries 

without the permission of the government, which was rarely given. 

Austria was sealed as nearly hermetically as possible against the 

liberal thought of Europe. Intellectual stagnation was the price 

paid. A system like this needed careful bolstering at every moment 

and at every point. The best protection for the Austrian system 

was to extend it to other countries. Having firmly established 

Application of j|- ^^ home, Metternich labored with great skill and temporary 

nich system succcss to apply it in surrounding countries, in Germany 

countries through the Diet and the state governments, in Italy through 

interventions and treaties, binding Italian states not to 

follow policies opposed to the Austrian, and in general by bringing 

about a close accord of the Great Powers on this illiberal basis. 

We shall now trace the application of this conception of govern- 
ment in other countries. This will serve among other things to show 
the dominant position of the Austrian Empire in Europe from 1815 to 
1848. Vienna, the seat of rigid conservatism, was now the center of 
European affairs, as Paris, the home of revolution, had been for so 
long. 

GERMANY 

One of the important problems presented to the Congress of 

Vienna concerned the future organization of Germany. The Holy 

Germany a Roman Empire had disappeared in 1 806 at the hands of Na- 

loose con- poleon. The Confederation of the Rhine, which he had 

era ion created to take its place, had disappeared with its creator. 

Something must evidently be put in its place. The outcome of the 

deliberations was the establishment of the German Confederation 

which was the government of Germany from 1815 to 1866. The 

Confederation consisted of thirty-eight states. The central organ of 

the government was to be a Diet, meeting at Frankfort. This was 

to consist, not of representatives chosen by the people, but of 

delegates appointed by the different sovereigns and serving 

during their pleasure. They were to be, not deputies empowered to 

decide questions, but simply diplomatic representatives, voting as 



THE GERMAN CONFEDERATION 321 

their princes might direct. Austria was always to have the presi- 
dency of this body. The method of procedure within the Diet 
was comphcated and exceedingly cumbrous, making action difficult, 
delay and obstruction easy. The Confederation did not constitute 
a real nation but only a loose league of independent states. The 
states agreed not to make war upon each other and that was about 
the only serious obligation they assumed. The federal government 
was remarkable mainly for its defects. The legislature, or Diet of 
Frankfort, was most inefficient. In all important legislation each 
state had practically a veto. In addition there was really no execu- 
tive, and the judicial branch was extremely rudimentary. It was left 
to the rulers of the separate states to carry out the decisions of the Diet. 
As a matter of fact they executed them only when they wished to. 

The Confederation was a union of princes, not of peoples. It was 
created because each prince was jealous of every other prince, and was 
far more concerned with the preservation of his own power 
than with the prosperity of Germany. Now the spirit of e^ation^^^ 
nationality had been tremendously aroused by the struggles ^^}^° °* 
with Napoleon. . All the more progressive spirits felt that ^"""^^^ 
the first need of Germany was unity and a strong national govern- 
ment. But German unity was, according to Metternich, an "in- 
famous object" and Metternich was supported by the selfishness of 
the German rulers, not one of whom was willing to surrender any 
particle of his authority. Intense was the indignation of all Liberals 
at what they called this "great deception" of Vienna. 

The Liberals experienced another disappointment too. As they 
desired unity, they also desired liberty. They wished a constitution 
for each one of the thirty-eight states ; they wished a parlia- ^^ , 

"^ -^ ^ The demand 

ment m each; they wished to have the reign of absolutism forconsti- 
brought to a close. It had seemed at one moment as if this *"'*°'*^ 
might be achieved. In appealing to his people to rally around him 
in the war against Napoleon, the King of Prussia had very recently 
promised his people a constitution and had urged at the Congress of 
Vienna that the Federal Act should require every member of the 
Confederation to grant a representative constitution to his subjects 
within a year. Metternich, even more opposed to free political ^ . 
institutions than to a strong central government, succeeded in successful 
thwarting the reformers at this point also, by having this ex- "pp"^'***"* 
plicit and mandatory declaration made vague and lifeless. Thus the 



322 THE CONGRESSES 

famous Article XIII of the Federal Act which established the Con- 
federation was made to read : "A constitution based upon the system 
of estates will be established in all the states of the union." The 
character of the promised constitution was not sketched ; and the 
time limit was omitted. A journalist was justified in saying that 
all that was guaranteed to the German people was an "unlimited 
right of expectation." The future was to show the vanity even of 
expectation, the hoUowness of even so mild a promise. The Liberals 
had desired something more substantial than hope. Austria and 
Prussia, the two leading states, governing the great mass of the 
German people, never executed this provision. Nor did many of 
the smaller states. A few of the princes, however, did, notably the 
Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar, the patron of Goethe and Schiller. 

Metternich's program was to secure the prevalence in Germany 

of the same principles that prevailed in Austria. He believed that to 

-. . , allow the people to participate in government was to flood the 

plan for State with ignorance, passion, envy, and all uncharitableness : 

Germany ^j^^^ ^^^ concessions to democracy would lead straight to 

anarchy. His purpose was to instill this idea into the minds of those 

sovereigns who did not have it ; also to arouse timid rulers, like the 

King of Prussia, to such a pitch of fear that they would actively 

cooperate with him in his efforts to stamp out liberal ideas wherever 

they might appear. Certain incidents of the day gave him favorable 

occasions to apply the system of repression which in his opinion was 

the only sure cure for the ills of this world. 

The years immediately succeeding 1815 were years of restlessness 

and discontent. This disappointment of Liberals was intense, their 

_.. . ^ criticism bitter, when they saw their hopes turned to ashes. 

Disappoint- ' -' '^ 

ment of Ger- The chief seat of disaffection was found in the universities 

man Liberals ^^^ ^^ newspapers edited by university men. Student socie- 
ties kept alive the exalted feelings for unity aroused by the wars with 
Napoleon, and were ardently patriotic and democratic in sentiment. 
In the year 1817 a large number of delegates from these student socie- 
ties in the various universities held a patriotic festival at the Wart- 
burg, a castle famous in connection with the career of Martin Luther. 
Their festival was religious as well as patriotic and was a com- 

Wartburg memoration of the battle of Leipsic and of the Reformation. 

Festival j^^ members partook of the Lord's Supper together and 

listened to impassioned speeches commemorating the great moments 



WIDESPREAD DISCONTENT IN GERMANY 323 

in German history. They showed their enthusiastic admiration of 
the Duke of Weimar. In the evening they built a bonfire and threw 
into it various symbols of the hated reaction, notably an illiberal 
pamphlet of which the King of Prussia had expressed his approval. 
Such was the Wartburg Festival, which Metternich described in 
gloomy language to the rulers of Germany. Somewhat later a stu- 
dent killed a journalist and playwright, Kotzebue (kot'-se-bo), who 
was hated in university circles as a Russian spy. These and other 
occurrences played perfectly into the hands of Metternich, who was 
seeking the means of establishing reaction in Germany as it had 
been established in Austria. He secured the passage by the fright- 
ened princes of the Carlsbad Decrees (1819). These decrees were 
rushed through the Diet by illegal and violent methods. By xhe Carlsbad 
them Metternich became the conqueror of the Confederation. Decrees 
They were the work of Austria, seconded by Prussia. They signified 
in German history the suppression of liberty for a generation. 
They really determined the political system of Germany until 1848. 
They provided for a vigorous censorship of the press, and subjected 
the professors and students of the universities to a close government 
supervision. All teachers who should propagate "harmful doc- 
trines," that is, who should in any way criticize Metternich's ideas of 
government, should be removed from their positions and once so 
removed could not be appointed to any other positions in Germany. 
The student societies were suppressed. Any student expelled from 
one university was not to be admitted into any other. By these 
provisions it was expected that the entire academic community, 
professors and students, would be reduced to silence. Another 
provision was directed against the establishment of any further 
constitutions of a popular character. Thus free parliaments, free- 
dom of the press, freedom of teaching, and free speech were out- 
lawed. 

The Carlsbad Decrees represent an important turning point in 
the history of Central Europe. They signalized the dominance of 
Metternich in Germany as well as in Austria. Prussia now 
docilely followed Austrian leadership, abandoning all liberal the order 
policies. The King, Frederick William III, had, in his hour pf the day 

in Germany 

of need, promised a constitution to Prussia. He never kept 

this promise. On the other hand, he inaugurated a peculiarly odious 

persecution of all Liberals, which was marked by many acts as inane 



324 THE CONGRESSES 

as they were cruel. Prussia entered upon a dull, drab period of 
oppression. 

Let us now see how the same ideas were applied in otlier countries. 



In 1 80S Napoleon had, as we have seen, seized the crown of Spain, 
and until 18 14 had kept the Spanish King, Ferdinand MI, virtually a 
Aco&stitn- prisoner m France, placing his own brother Joseph on tlie 
tionai vacant tlirone. The Spaniards rose against tlie usurper and 

monarchy ^^^ years carried on a vigorous guerrilla warfare, aided by the 
English, and ending rinally in success. As their King was in the 
hands of the enem}' the}' proceeded in his name to frame a govern- 
ment. Being liberal-minded tliey drew up a constitution, the famous 
Constitution of 181 2, which was closely modeled on tlie French 
Constitution of 1791. It asserted the sovereignty^ of the people, 
thus discarding the rival theory' of the monarchy bj' divine right 
Ferdinand which had hitlierto been the accepted basis of the Spanish 
vn 1814- state. This democratic document, however, did not have long 
^^ to live, as Ferdinand, on his retuni to Spain after the o\-er- 

throw of Napoleon, immediately suppressed it and embarked upon a 
polic}' of angry reaction. The press was gagged. Books of a liberal 
character were destroj'ed wherever found, aiid particularh' all copies 
of the constitution. Thousands of political prisoners were severely 
punished. 

\^igorous and efficient in stamping out all liberal ideas, the govern- 
ment of Ferdinand was indolent and incompetent in otiier matters. 
Inefficiency Spain, a country of about eleven million people, was wretchedly 
of the gov- poor and ignorant. The government, however, made no 
emmen attempt to improve conditions. Moreover it failed to dis- 

charge the most fundamental duty of any government, that is, to 
preserve the mtegritj' of the empire. The Spanish colonies in 
America had been for several years in revolt against the mother 
countn,' and the government had made no serious efforts to put 
down tiie rebellion. 

Such conditions, of course, aroused great discontent. The army 

particularly was angn,' at the treatment it had received and became a 

Revolution breeding place of conspiracies. A military- uprising occurred 

of i8ao in 1820 which swept ever\-tliing before it and which forced 

the Iving to restore tiie Constitution of 1S12 and to promise hence- 



REACTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY 325 

forth to govern in accordance with its provisions. The text of the 
constitution was posted in every city, and parish priests were ordered 
to expound it to their congregations. 

Thus revolution had triumphed again, and only five years after 
Waterloo. An absolute monarch}', based on divine right, had been 
changed into a constitutional monarchy based on the sovereignty of 
the people. Would the example be followed elsewhere ? Would the 
Holy Alliance look on in silence? Had the revolutionary spirit been 
so carefully smothered in Austria, Germany, and France, only to 
blaze forth in outlying sections of Europe? Answers to these 
questions were quickly forthcoming. 



Italy, like other countries, had been profoundly affected by the 
liberal ideas of the French Revolution, and particularly by the restless 
activity of Napoleon, who, from the beginning of his career ^^^ ^j ^^ 
to its close, had drawn her within the range of his policies awakens 
and manipulations. At first the Italians had hailed him as ^'^^^ 
the looked-for deliverer from oppression, a feeling that gave way to 
hatred when the youthful conqueror set up, in the place of the 
despotism overthrown, a despotism more severe, although at the 
same time more intelligent. For many years the fate of Italy was 
determined by his will. He did much to improve the laws, much 
to stimulate industry, much to break up musty old habits and 
conventions. New ideas, political and social, penetrated the 
peninsula with him. He shook the Italians out of their som- 
nolence and imparted to them an energy they had not known for 
centuries. But he offended them by his heavy exactions of men 
and money for his constant wars, by his shameless robbery of their 
works of art, and by his treatment of the Pope. 

Then he fell, and the Congress of Vienna restored most of the old 
states which had existed before he first came into Italy. There were 
henceforth ten of them : Piedmont, Lombardy-Venetia, ^j^^ ^^^ 
Parma, Modena, Lucca, Tuscany, the Papal States, Naples, Italian 
Monaco, and San Marino. Genoa and Venice, until re- ^***^^ 
cently independent republics, were not restored, as republics were not 
"fashionable." The one was given to Piedmont, the other to Austria. 

These states were too small to be self-sufficient, and as a result Italy 
was for nearly fifty years the sport of foreign powers, dependent, 



326 THE CONGRESSES 

henceforth, not upon France but upon Austria. This is the cardinal 

fact in the situation and is an evidence, as it is a partial cause, of the 

commanding position of the Austrian monarchy after the fall of 

Napoleon. Austria was given outright the richest part of the 

nance of Po Valley as a Lombardo-Venetian kingdom. Austrian 

Austria in princes or princesses ruled over the duchies of Modena, Parma, 

and Tuscany, and were easily brought into the Austrian system. 

Thus was Austria the master of northern Italy ; master of southern 

Italy, too, for Ferdinand, King of Naples, made an offensive and 

defensive treaty with Austria, pledging himself to make no separate 

alliances and to grant no liberties to his .subjects beyond those which 

obtained in Lombardy and Venetia. Naples was thus but a satellite 

in the great Austrian system. The King of Piedmont and the Pope 

were the only Italian princes at all likely to be intractable. And 

Austria's strength in comparison with theirs was that of a giant 

compared with that of pygmies. 

Thus the restoration was accomplished. Italy became again a col- 
lection of small states, largely under the dominance of Austria. 
Each of the restored princes was an absolute monarch. In none of 
the states was there a parliament. Italy had neither unity nor 
constitutional forms, nor any semblance of popular participation 
in the government. The use which the restored princes made of their 
unfettered liberty of action was significant. 

Hating the French, they undertook to extinguish all reminders of 
that odious people. They abolished all constitutions and many laws 
and institutions of French origin. Vaccination and gas illu- 
reaction^ mination were forbidden for the simple reason that the French 

had introduced them. In Piedmont French plants in the 
Botanic Gardens of Turin were torn up, French furniture in the royal 
palace was destroyed in response to this vigorous and infantile emo- 
tion. In every one of the states there was distinct retrogression and 
the Italians lost ground all along the line — politically, industrially, 
socially. In general the Inquisition was restored. Education was 
handed over to the clergy. The course of studie.^ was carefully 
purged of everything that might be dangerous. The police paid 
particular attention to "the class called thinkers." 

Thus Italy was ruled by petty despots and in a petty spirit. More- 
over most of the princes took their cue from Austria, the nature of 
whose policies we have already examined. The natural result of 



REVOLUTION IN NAPLES 327 

such conditions was deep and widespread discontent. All the pro- 
gressive elements of the population which believed in freedom in 
education, in religion, in business were disaffected, as were also widespread 
many who were dismissed from the army or from governmental discontent 
positions on the ground that they had been contaminated with the 
previous French regime. The discontented joined the Carbonari, a 
secret society, and bided their time. 

That time came when the news reached Italy of the successful and 
bloodless Spanish Revolution of 1820. In Naples a military insur- 
rection broke out. The revolutionists demanded the Spanish ^^^ ^^ ^^ 
Constitution of 1812, not because they knew much about it tionofiSio 
but because it was very democratic and possessed the advan- "* ^^ ^^ 
tage of being ready-made. The King immediately yielded and the 
constitution was proclaimed. 

THE CONGRESSES 

Thus in 1820 the Revolution, so hateful to the diplomats of 1815, 
had resumed the offensive. Spain and Naples had overthrown the 
regime that had been in force five years, and had adopted constitu- 
tions that were thoroughly saturated with the principles of Revolu- 
tionary France. There had likewise been a revolution against the 
established regime in Portugal. There was shortly to be one in 
Piedmont. 

Metternich, the most influential personage in Europe, who felt the 
world resting on his shoulders, had very clear views as to the require- 
ments of the situation that had arisen. Anything that The powers 
threatened the peace of Europe was a very proper thing for a prepare to 
European congress to discuss. A revolution in one country these revo- 
may encourage a revolution in another and thus the world, set •"*'°'*^ 
in order by the Congress of Vienna, may soon find itself in conflagra- 
tion once more, the established order everywhere threatened. Met- 
ternich recommended as a sure cure the doctrine of the "right ^j^^ .^^ 
of interventioiij" a doctrine new in international law but of 
which he succeeded in having applied for several years. The "* ^'^^ 
doctrine was that, as modern Europe was based upon opposition to 
revolution, the powers had the right and were in duty bound to inter- 
vene to put down revolution, not only in their own states respectively, 
but in any state of Europe, against the will of the people of that 



328 THE CONGRESSES 

Ptate, even against the will of the sovereign of that state, in the 
Mterests of the established monarchical order. A change of govern- 
ment within a given state was not a domestic but an international 
affair. . 

Metternich won the support of Russia, Prussia, and Austria for this 
doctrine, which virtually denied the independence of every nation, the 
. right of the people of any state to change their form of govern- 

and the Holy mcnt to any Other model than that of absolute monarchy. 

Alliance These were the original "Holy Allies," all absolute monarchs, 

and it was their steady, undeviating support of the ominous principle 
which made the Holy Alliance a synonym everywhere for tyranny, 
odious to all liberals in Europe and America. 

A Congress was held at Troppau in 1820 and at Laibach in 1821 to 

consider the question of Naples. It was participated in by the three 

powers mentioned and by France and England. The two 

grass of last named did not join in the declaration of the new doctrine, 

Troppau ^^^ ^-^^^ remained passive and the absolute powers, Austria, 

Prussia, and Russia, had their way. They commissioned Austria 
to send an army into the Kingdom of Naples, to abolish the consti- 
tution, and to restore absolutism. This was done. The results were 
for the Neapolitans most deplorable. The reaction that ensued 
was unrestrained. Hundreds were imprisoned, exiled, executed. 
Arbitrary government of the worst kind was meted out to this 
unfortunate people. 

Just as this Neapolitan revolution was being snuffed out a similar 
revolution blazed up at the opposite end of the peninsula, in Pied- 
mont, the revolutionists demanding the Spanish Constitu- 

The revo- ' a f 

lution in tion of i8i2, as the most liberal one they knew of, and war 

Pie mont against Austria as the great enemy of Piedmont and Italy. 
The King, Victor Emanuel I, rather than yield to the demand for 
a revolution, abdicated and was succeeded by his brother, Charles 
Felix (March 13, 182 1). The new King was a despot by nature and 
he now had the support of the same powers that had shown their 
intentions in regard to revolutions. Charles Felix, assisted by the 
Austrians, routed the revolutionists at Novara. The revolution was 
over. Once more the demand for constitutional freedom had been 
suppressed, once more Metternich had triumphed. Needless to say 
he was quite satisfied. " I see the dawn of a better day," he wrote. 
"Heaven seems to will it that the world shall not be lost." 



TRIUMPHS OF THE HOLY ALLIANCE 329 

The two Italian revolutions had been suppressed. The doctrine of 
intervention was working satisfactorily to its authors. It was now 
applied again, this time to Spain, in which country, as we ^j^^ ^^^ 
have seen, the revolutionary movement of these years had gress of 
begun. The consideration of Spanish affairs had had to 
give way to the more immediate and pressing affairs of Italy. The 
principle there, however, was the same and the Allies now prepared to 
assert it. This was the work of the Congress of Verona (1822). 
Austria, Russia, and Prussia regarded a constitutional government in 
Spain as a menace to their own system of absolutism. They there- 
fore commissioned France, now a thoroughly reactionary country, 
to restore Ferdinand to his former power. England opposed this 
policy with high indignation, but in vain. The French sent an army 
of a hundred thousand men into the peninsula, which was easily 
victorious. The war was soon over and Ferdinand was back on his 
absolute throne, by act of France, supported by the Holy Alliance. 

There now began a period of odious reaction. All the acts passed 
by the Cortes since 1820 were annulled. An organization called the 
"Society of the Exterminating Angel" began a mad hunt Reaction in j 
for Liberals, throwing them into prison, shooting them down. ^p^'° 
The war of revenge knew no bounds. "Juntas of Purification" 
urged it on. Thousands were driven from the country, hundreds 
were executed. The French government, ashamed of its protege, 
endeavored to stop the savagerj^ but with slight success. It is an 
odious chapter in the history of Spain. 

The Holy Alliance, by these triumphs in Naples, Piedmont, and 
Spain, showed itself the dominant force in European politics. 
The system, named after Metternich, because his diplomacy had triumph of 
built it up and because he stood in the very center of it, seemed *J|^. ^^'y 
firmly established as the European system. But it had 
achieved its last notable triumph. It was now to receive a series 
of checks which were to limit it forever. 

Having restored absolutism in Spain the Holy Allies considered re- 
storing to Spain her revolted American colonies. In this purpose they 
encountered the pronounced opposition of England and the 
United States, both of which were willing that Spain herself Alliance and 
should try to recover them but not that the Holy Alliance ^^^ Monroe 

■' -^ Doctrine 

should recover them for her. As England controlled the seas 

she could prevent the Alliance from sending troops to the scene of 



9 



330 THE CONGRESSES 

revolt. The President of the United States, James Monroe, in a 
message to Congress (December 2, 1823), destined to become one of 
the most famous documents ever written in the White House, an- 
nounced that we should consider any attempt on the part of these 
absolute monarchs to extend their system to any portion of this 
hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety, as the "manifesta- 
tion of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States. "1/ This 
attitude of England and the United States produced its effect. 
After this no new laurels were added to the Holy Alliance. A few 
years later Russia was herself encouraging and supporting a revolu- 
tion on the part of the Greeks against the Turks, and in 1830 revolu- 
tions broke out in France and Belgium which demolished the system 
of Metternich beyond all possible repair. 

REFERENCES 

Congress of Vienna : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 380-387, 41 1- 
418; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution of Prussia, pp. 256-276; Sybel, 
The Founding of the German Empire, Vol. I, Chap. Ill ; Cambridge Modern 
History, Vol. IX, Chaps. XIX and XXI. 

Reaction in Germany after 1815 : Henderson, Short History of Germany, 
Vol. II, Chap. VIII, pp. 324-343 ; Marriott and Robertson, Chap. IX, pp. 277- 
304 ; Schevill, The Making of Modern Germany, pp. 99-1 14 ; Fyffe, pp. 446-469 ; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XI, pp. 340-382. 

Reaction in Italy after 1815: Probyn, Italy, 1815 to 1870, pp. 1-27; 
Bolton King, A History of Italian Unity, Vol. I, Chaps. III-V; Thayer, Dawn 
of Italian Independence, Vol. I, pp. 139-31 1 ; Stillman, Unity of Italy, pp. 1-40; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. IV, pp. 104-130. 

Reaction in Spain after 181 5: Butler Clarke, Modern Spain, Chaps. II 
and III ; Hume, Modern Spain, Chap. V ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, 
pp. 205-230. 

The Congresses : Fyffe, pp. 478-524 ; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 57-134 ; 
Seignobos, Political History of Europe since 1814, pp. 747-762 ; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. I, pp. 1-39. 



CHAPTER XV 

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 

While the tremendous changes from the institutions of the old 
regime to those of the modern were being accomplished amid the 
turbulence of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, other 
changes of vast though incalculable significance were being accom- 
plished silently in the economic life of that country which was the 
one constant enemy of France and Napoleon, namely, England. 
Indeed England's ability to endure the strain of the long struggle 
with her enemy across the channel, and in the end to emerge victo- 
rious, was owing to this generally unnoticed but radical transformation 
in the conditions of English industry, in the methods used by English- 
men in earning their living, in creating wealth. These changes, first 
occurring in Great Britain and later adopted on the Continent, began 
in the last quarter of the eighteenth century and had been going on 
ever since. They constitute what has been appropriately called 
the Industrial Revolution. 

THE AGE OF STEAM 

The transformation of industry and commerce accomplished since 
George III came to the throne in 1760 is unique in the history of 
the world, a transformation so sweeping that in this respect 
the present age differs more from that of George III than did T^^ . 

. invention 

his from that of Rameses II. This transformation has been of the 
the result of a long series of discoveries and inventions. Among e^gj™ 
these one stands preeminent, the placing at the disposition of 
man of a new motive force of incomparable consequence, steam, 
rendered available by the perfection of an engine for the transmission 
of its power. Steam engines had been in existence since early in the 
eighteenth century, the invention of a mechanic named Newcomen. 
But they were poorly constructed, wasteful in their use of fuel. 

331 



332 THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 

The device of Newcomen was studied and so greatly improved by 
James Watt (1736-18 19) that he is generally considered the inventor 
of the steam engine. He made it a practical machine, and thereby 
inaugurated a new age, the age of steam. 

Consider for an instant the significance of the new agency. Up 
to the advent of the age of steam, industry and commerce were 
The dom ti essentially what they had been for many centuries. Pre- 
system of viously the only motive force had come from animal strength, 
pro uction ^^^ from wind and falling water exploited by windmills and 
water-wheels. Mankind had very few machines, but manufacture was 
literally, as the word indicates, production by hand and was carried 
on in small shops generally connected with the home of the manu- 
facturer. There, in the midst of a few workmen, the proprietor 
himself worked. The implements were few, the relation of master 
and journeyman and apprentice intimate and constant, the dif- 
ferences of their conditions comparatively slight. Industry was 
truly domestic. In general each town produced the commodities 
which it required. Production was on a small scale and was designed 
largely for the local market. Necessarily so, for the difficulty of 
communication restricted commerce. Down to the nineteenth 
century men traveled and goods were carried in the way with which 
the world had been familiar since time began. Only by horse or by 
boat could merchandise be conveyed. Roads were few in number, 
poor in quality, bridges were woefully infrequent, so that traveler 
and cart were stopped by rivers, over which they were carried slowly, 
and often with danger, by boats and ferries. Practically no great 
improvement had been made in locomotion since the earliest times, 
save in the betterment of roadbeds and the establishment of regular 
stage-routes. Napoleon, fleeing from Russia in 1812, and anxious 
to reach Paris as quickly as possible, left the army, and with a 
traveling and sleeping carriage and constant relays of fresh horses, 
succeeded", by extraordinary efforts day and night, in covering a thou- 
sand miles in five days, which was- an average rate of eight or nine 
miles an hour, a remarkable ride for an age of horse conveyance. 
Where the Emperor of the French, commanding all the resources of 
his time, could do no better, of course the average traveler moved 
much more slowly and merchandise more slowly still. 

The transmission of information could not be more rapid than 
the means of locomotion. The postal service was primitive, postage 



THE TEXTILE INDUSTRIES 333 

was high and very variable, and was paid by the receiver. In France, 
after 1793, there was a kind of aerial telegraph which, by means of 
signals, operated from the tops of poles, like those along the lines 
of modern railroads, could transmit intelligence from Paris to other 
cities rapidly. But this invention was monopolized by the State 
and moreover ceased to operate when darkness or rain came on. 



VARIOUS APPLICATIONS OF THE STEAM ENGINE 

Into this world of small industries and limited commerce came 
the revolutionary steam engine, destined to effect an economic 
transformation unparalleled in the history of the race. It invention of 
was applied to industry, then to commerce. First employed machinery 
in mining, it was early adopted by the manufacturers of textUe^ 
cotton and woolen goods to give the force for the inventions "i^ustnes 
of Crompton and Arkwright and Hargreaves and Cartwright, in- 
ventions which succeeded each other rapidly after 1767, and which 
completely revolutionized one of the world's basic industries, textile 
manufacturing. 

The making of cloth consists of two main processes, first the 
spmning of the thread out of the raw material, cotton, wool, or 
flax, then the weaving of the thread into a solid fabric, cloth, spinning 
The art of spinning had been known for ages, but it had not ^^^ weaving 
greatly developed. By the distafif and spindle, or by the spinning 
wheel, a person could make a thread, but he could only make one 
thread at a time. In 1767 James Hargreaves, an English spinner, 
invented the so-called spinning jenny which enabled him to make 
eight or ten threads at once, thus doing the work of eight or ten men. 
In 1769 Richard Arkwright invented a "water frame" or a . , . ^ , 

Arkwright s 

machine which spun a stronger and firmer thread and which, • water 
moreover, was immensely more productive as it was run by aniTthe 
water power instead of by hand or foot. But Arkwright's factory 
machines were so heavy that they had to be installed in ^^^ ^™ 
special buildings or factories. Later inventions resulted in machines 
spinning two hundred threads at the same time. At this rate spin- 
ning outdistanced weaving and improvements must be made in the 
processes of weaving or this enormous increase in the output of 
thread could not be utilized. The crying need produced the man 
to solve it. Dr. Edmund Cartwright, a clergyman, constructed a 



334 THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 

self-acting loom, run by water power, and increasing greatly the 
rapidity with which weaving could be done. 

Since these revolutionary innovations of the eighteenth century 
in the arts of spinning and weaving, other inventions too numerous 
to mention have been made, perfecting and facilitating every part 
of the general process of textile manufacture. A single machine 
now does the work which formerly required the labor of a hundred 
or two hundred men. 

What was thus accomplished in the textile industries was later 

accomplished in others, particularly in the manufacture of iron. 

Machinery Wherever possible the machine was substituted for the human 

to fhelron being. A single individual could tend many machines and thus 

industry several other individuals were released for other work. The 

productive power of the race was greatly, in some lines fabulously, 

augmented. It was inevitable that these improved processes would 

be applied on a larger and larger scale and to more and more branches 

of activity and that the grand total of manufactured articles would 

exceed the wildest imaginations of men. 

But no sooner did machines become common than it was seen 

that a new motive force was necessary to run them. They were 

usually too heavy to be operated by human strength, by the 

The steam i i r -^ r • i i 

engine arm or by the foot. Moreover wmd and water power were 

fndustr *° restricted in amount and were precarious. The wind might 
cease, the river might run dry. The new industry that was 
developing needed a new motive force, always procurable, inexhaust- 
ible in amount, and capable of easy regulation. This new force 
was, as already indicated, at hand, — steam, now rendered available 
for the new and enormous work by the inventions of James Watt. 
The steam engine became the center of the modern factory system 
of production, the throbbing heart of every industry. The machine 
superseded the hand of man as the chief element in production, 
increasing the output ultimately in certain lines a hundred, even a 
thousand-fold. Domestic industry waned and disappeared. Manu- 
facturing became concentrated in large establishments employing 
hundreds of men, and ultimately thousands. And this concentration 
of industry caused the rapid growth of cities, one of the characteristic 
features of the nineteenth century. 

But there was a limit imposed upon the utility of the steam engine 
in industry. Production on the large scale involved necessarily two 



INVENTION OF THE STEAMBOAT 335 

other factors — ■ larger sources of supply from which to draw the raw 
materials, larger markets for the finished products. Right here the 
inadequate means of communication called halt. The neces- ,. ^ , 

^ . applied to 

sity for improvement was imperative. A single illustration is transporta- 
suiftcient evidence. The port of Liverpool and the great manu- *'°° 
facturing city of Manchester were separated by only about thirty 
miles. Three canals connected them, yet traffic on them was so 
congested that it sometimes took a month for cotton to reach the 
factories from the sea. The new machine industry was in danger of 
strangulation. IVIoreover the size of cities was conditioned upon the 
ability to procure food supplies, an ability strictly limited by the 
existing methods of transportation. 

The steam engine, applied to locomotion, came to the rescue 
of the steam engine applied to looms and spindles. And first to 
locomotion on water. Fulton's steamboat, the Clermont, leav- steam 
ing New York August 7, 1807, arrived at Albany, a hundred navigation 
and fifty miles distant, in thirty-two hours. The practicabiUty of 
steam navigation was thus, after much experimenting, definitely 
established. But steam navigation only slowl}^ eclipsed navigation 
by sail. In 18 14 there were only two steamers, with a tonnage of 
426 tons, in the whole British Empire. In 1816 Liverpool, which 
now has the largest steam fleet in existence, did not have a single 
steamer. It is impossible here to trace the growth of this method of 
locomotion. Its expansion was reasonably rapid. It was at first 
thought impossible to construct ships large enough to carry sufficient 
coal for long voyages. It was not until 1838 that a ship relying solely 
upon steam propulsion crossed the Atlantic Ocean. The Great 
Western, a British vessel, sailed from Bristol to New York in fifteen 
days, to the discomfiture of those who were at that very time showing 
the impossibility of such a feat. The experimental stage was over. 
In 1840 Samuel Cunard, a native of Nova Scotia, living in England, 
founded the first regular transatlantic steamship line, thus raising 
his name out of obscurity forever. In 1847 the Hamburg- American, 
in 1857 the North German Lloyd, in 1862 the French lines, began 
their notable careers, the two former ultimately constituting veritable 
fleets and serving all parts of the globe. 

But more important still was the application of steam to locomo- 
tion on land, the invention of the railroad. This, like most inven- 
tions, was a slow growth. In the mines and quarries of England carts 



3J;6 THE IXDUSTRIAI. RK\ Ol.UTION 

had for sv^me time been d^aw^l on mils made at rin>t ot wxxxi. later 
of iron. It was found that horses cx>uld thus draw much heavier 
inv^ntioa l^^^ds. the ftiction of the wheel being reduced. The next step 
of the was to substitute the steam engine for the horse. Several men 

«iirv>*d ^,^^ stud\"ing this problem in the early nineteenth centur\ . 

William Heviley. chief engineer of a collier}* near Newcastle, con- 
structed in iSi3. a locomotive. Pumn^ Bi7/\. which worked fairly 
well. The sigiiiticance of George Stephenson lies in the f-act that by 
his inventions and impR^vements. extending tha^ugh many years, he 
made it "actually cheaper/" to use his o\\n\ woais. "for the poor 
man to go by steam than to walk." His first locomotive, con- 
structed in 1S14. proved capable of hauling cxxil at the rate of three 
miles an hour, but at such a rate was riot commercially \-aluable. 
He perfected his machine by increasing the power of the boiler so 
that the RiKir^i was able to make thirty miles an hour at the opening 
of the Liverpool and Manchester railway in 1S30. The experimental 
stage was over. The railway was a proved success. Construction 
began fortliwith and has continued ever sint>?. The development 
of the new means of loo>motion has pnx^eeded with the development 
of chemistn,-, metallurgy, mechanic?, engineering, electricity. Rails 
have been consrantly improved. kxx>motives augmented in drawing 
power, bridges flung over rivers and ravines, tunnels cut thaiugh 
mounrains. Navigation, too, has had its record of triumph. Steam- 
ships, phnng regularly and in all directions, have become larger and 
larger, swifter and swifter, more and more numerous. Traveling and 
transportation have thus been revolutionized by methods entirely 
dissimilar from d\ose in e^tistence during all the previous historv* of 
mankii\d. They represent not a difference of degree, but of kind. 

The Industrial Revolution, begun in the closing quarter of the 
eighteenth centun*. has been in progress ever since. It had pav 
greased far in England by the time of the overthrow of Napoleon 
and it had been one of tlie causes of England's tinal victory- beoiuse 
of the great increase in wealth which it had brought her. This union 
of machiner\- with steam power multiplied tremendously the resources 
of mankind. Gradually the new methods, the new system of pro- 
duction, have been introduced into other countries, first into France, 
after 1S15. cmd later into Germany. There were several important 
consequences of the new system, some of which have already been 
indicated. 



Till': CllAXC.HD STATUS OF LABOR 337 

rili: FACTORY SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION 

The Industrial Revolution meant a chanf^e from home work to 
factory work. Freviously spinning, weaving, and other industries 
had been carried on in homes or in small shops and frequently ^^^^ 
all the members of the family, not only the men but the system 
women and the children, took part in the process. The head ^"pp'*°'«^ 
of the group himself owned the tools outright, bought the raw 
materials, and marketed the produce. It was truly a "domestic 
system" of manufacture, offering in general no great rewards, but 
insuring a sound and healthy life under conditions favorable for the 
development of mind and body. Under the new system, the work- 
ers must leave home for the day's labor, were gathered together in 
large numbers in factories which were at first poorly ventilated conditions 
and poorly lighted, and were frequently exposed to condi- of the 
tions that endangered health. They no longer owned their ^"[1,^^ 
own shops and tools, for the new factories were too large, the factory 
new machines too expensive, for any but the rich to own. ^^^ 
Thus the independent worker became a wage earner, selling his labor 
to another, and forced to sell it, if he would avoid starvation. Under 
the factory system women and children became competitors of the 
men, as they could tend the machines in most industries as well as the 
men, and would accept lower wages. This dislocation of the family 
from the home to the factory brought with it many evils and abuses, 
as did also the long hours of labor, and the frequent lack of employ- 
ment, owing to causes which the worker could not control, such as bad 
management of the business or glutting of the market. An entirely 
new set of problems arose out of the factory system, problems which 
will appear frequently in the course of this narrative, some of which 
have been solved more or less satisfactorily. Others await solution. 

Of course the great advantage of the factory system is that it 
has enabled men to produce in immensely greater quantities the 
necessities and comforts and even the luxuries of life. The xhe 
application of machinery to production, in agriculture, in manu- advantages 
facture, in transportation, has increased vastly the quantity factory 
and reduced the price of most commodities. Many products system 
which only the well-to-do could formerly enjoy are now within the 
[reach of the millions. The plane of living has been distinctly raised, 
Ibut the higher standard begets a desire for a standard higher still. 



338 THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 

But while this was and is a feature of the new system of pro- 
duction, its disadvantages to all but a few were more apparent in 
Significant the eighteenth and early nineteenth century. By differentiat- 
efifects ing more sharply than they had been differentiated before 

the two classes engaged in the process of production, namely the 
wage earners and the capitalists, the factory system raised a large 
number of difficult, contentious questions concerning the relations of 
capital and labor, questions that have preoccupied and perplexed 
the world for a full century and whose solution is not yet in sight. 
By collecting together in large factories hundreds and even thousands 
of men, women, and children, who had previously worked in small 
shgps or at home, it created grave problems concerning the health 
and morals and mental development of the workers. By bringing 
the workers together it caused them to know each other better, to 
sympathize more with each other, and it inevitably led them to 
organize into unions for the protection and furtherance of their 
collective and individual interests. By bringing about a more and 
more minute subdivision of labor, eighty or a hundred persons, for 
instance, being employed in making the different parts of a shoe 
where formerly under the old system of hand labor the shoemaker 
made the entire shoe, the factory system has greatly multiplied the 
output by increasing the dexterity of the individual laborer, who, 
however, repeating the same motions over and over again finds his 
work less interesting, more tedious — which is one of the reasons why 
he demands a shorter working day. But by increasing the output 
it has reduced prices and brought many commodities within the 
reach of the laboring man which previously were quite beyond it. 
By building up large factory towns, by encouraging emigration from 
the country to the city, the factory system has affected municipal life 
profoundly, introducing new factors into politics, both local and 
national. Many were the good features of the new industrial regime, 
many the evil. That regime has gone on steadily developing ever 
since it was introduced in the eighteenth century for the reason 
that it offered more to humanity than the system it displaced. But 
on the other hand the undeniable evils which it brought in its train 
have aroused a more and more determined and more and more 
widespread discontent and opposition, and a prolonged, varied, and 
increasingly successful campaign against those evils has been, as we 
shall see, one of the conspicuous features of modern history. 



CHAPTER XVI 
AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

The French Revolution had set m motion a wave of salutary 
reform which swept away numberless abuses, and demolished or trans- 
formed outworn and harmful institutions, not only in France, 
but in other European states. To the credit of the Revolution influence of 
is therefore due a decided improvement in the conditions of *^^^ French 
life in many countries, notably in France, Germany, and Italy. 
But upon one country its effect was wholly unfortunate. England 
had long needed a thoroughgoing reorganization of her institutions 
and policies, if they were to conform to even an elementary concep- 
tion of, justice. The ablest writers and thinkers had long ago 
indicated in unambiguous language the changes that were influence 
required and that were feasible, and a statesman like William "pon 
Pitt had recognized the force of their criticisms and was dis- °^^° 
posed to undertake the work of quickening the national life by breath- 
ing a new spirit into it. Then came the Revolution, enthusiastically 
hailed at first by the more liberal-minded as the dawn of a new and 
happier era. But conservative Englishmen were outraged by the 
attacks of the French upon property rights and social discriminations 
and when the excesses of the Revolution came, the vast majority 
of them were frightened by the very idea of change. Would ^j^^ ^^^g 
not any reform lead to the same excesses in England ? This was conservatism 
the chord all English conservatives, led by the rhetorical ° °^ ^'^ 
Edmund Burke, continually harped upon. The result was that 
reform had no chance in England from 1793 to 181 5, that changes 
which would have been an unqualified blessing were delayed for a 
whole generation. 

Even after the long war with France was over and the battle of 
W'aterloo was won, the same unreasonable dread of any change 
continued and the same attitude of stiff, implacable opposition to all 
reform. This unbending, undeviating hostility to all change on the 

339 



340 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

part of the British ParUament, controlled during all this period by the 
Tory party, is easily understood when we come to examine 
land of^ the the Structure of English institutions and English public and 
Old Regime private life. The Revolution proclaimed the doctrine of 
equality and proceeded to abolish privilege. But England was con- 
spicuously a land of privilege, of glaring discriminations between 
social classes, a land emphatically of the Old Regime. Inequality, 
of a pronounced character, reigned in church and state and school. 



SOCIAL AND POLITICAL STATUS OF ENGLAND 

Power rested with the aristocracy, composed of the nobility and the 

gentry. The "local self-government" of England, so much praised 

and idealized abroad, as if it were government of the people 

Commanding ' ° t^ f 

position of by the people, did not exist. In the county governments 
t eno ity the local nobility filled most of the important offices; in the 
borough governments their influence was generally decisive. In the 
national government, that is, in Parliament, the aristocracy was 
solidly intrenched. The House of Lords was composed almost 
exclusively of large landed proprietors. This was the very bulwark 
of the dominant social class. But the House of Commons was 
another stronghold hardly less secure. This body, generally sup- 
posed to represent the commoners of England, conspicuously failed 
to do so. Its composition was truly extraordinary. 

The House of Commons in 1815 consisted of 658 members : 489 of 
these were returned by England, 100 by Ireland, 45 by Scotland, 24 by 
The House Wales. There were three kinds of constituencies, the counties, 
of Commons ^^g boroughs, and the universities. In England each county 
had two members, and nearly all of the boroughs had two each, 
though a few had but one. Representation had no relation to the 
size of the population in either case. A large county and a 
The system small county, a large borough and a small borough, had 
tation"^^^*" the same number of members. In times past the king had 
possessed the right to summon this town and that to send 
up two burgesses to London. Once given that right it usually re- 
tained it. If a new town should grow up, the monarch might give 
it the right, but he was not obliged to. Since 1625 only two new 
boroughs had been created. Thus the constitution of the House 
of Commons had become stereotyped at a time when population was 



THE SUFFRAGE IN GREAT BRITAIN 341 

increasing and was also shifting greatly from old centers to new. A 
growing inequality in the representation was a feature of the political 
system. Thus the county and borough representation of the ten 
southern counties of England was 237, and of the thirty others only 
252 ; yet the latter had a population nearly three times as large as 
the former. All Scotland returned only 45 members, while the single 
English county of Cornwall (including its boroughs, of course) 
returned 44. Yet the population of Scotland was eight times as 
large as that of Cornwall. 



The Old Parliament Buildings. Burned in 1834 
After an aquatint by R. Ha veil. 

The suffrage in the counties was uniform, and was enjoyed by those 
who owned land yielding them an income of forty shillings a year. 
But as this worked out it gave a very restricted suffrage. The The county 
county voters were chiefly the men who had large country suffrage 
estates, and their dependents. Counties in which there were so 
few voters could be easily controlled by the wealthy landowners. In 
all Scotland there were not three thousand county voters ; yet the 
population of Scotland was nearly two millions. Fife had 240 
voters, Cromarty, 9. The climax was reached in Bute, where there 
were 21 voters out of a population of 14,000, only one of whom lived 
in the county. On a certain occasion only one voter attended the 



342 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

election meeting of that county. He constituted himself chairman, 
nominated himself, called the list of voters, and declared himself 
elected to Parliament. 

Such was the situation in the counties of Great Britain, which re- 
turned 1 86 members to the House of Commons. But more important 
were the boroughs, which returned 467 members.^ In the boroughs. 
The suffrage too, the influence of the landowning and wealthy class was 
in boroughs even greater and more decisive than in the counties. The 
boroughs were of several kinds or types — nomination boroughs, 
rotten or close boroughs, boroughs in which there was a considerable 
body of voters, boroughs in which the suffrage was almost demo- 
cratic. It was the existence of the first two classes that contributed 
Nomination the most to the popular demand for the reform of the House, 
boroughs jj^ ^]^g nomination boroughs, the right to choose the two 

burgesses was completely in the hands of the patron. Such places 
might have lost all their inhabitants, yet, representation being an 
attribute of geographical areas rather than of population, these places 
were still entitled to their two members. Thus Corfe Castle was 
a ruin. Old Sarum a green mound, Gatton was part of a park, while 
Dunwich had long been submerged beneath the sea ; yet these places, 
entirely without inhabitants, still had two members each in the 
House of Commons, because it had been so decided centuries before, 
when they did have a population, and because the English Parliament 
took no account of changes. Thus the owner of the ruined wall, or 
the green mound, or this particular portion of the bottom of the sea, 
had "the right of nomination. 

In the rotten or close boroughs the members were elected by the 
corporation, that is, by the mayor and aldermen, or the suffrage was 
Rotten ill the hands of voters, who, however, were so few, from a 

boroughs dozen to fifty in many cases,^ and generally so poor that the 
patron could easily influence them by bribery or intimidation to 
choose his candidates. Elections in such cases were a mere matter 
of form. It has been stated that in 1793, 245 members were notori- 
ously returned by the influence of 128 peers. Thus peers, themselves 
sitting in the House of Lords, had representatives sitting in the other 
House. Lord Lonsdale thus returned nine members, and was 
known as "premier's cat-o' -nine-tails." Others returned six, five, 

1 The universities returned 5 members. 

2 Ninety members represented places of less than 50 voters each. 



THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM 343 

four apiece. Some would sell their appointments to the highest 
bidder. Some of the most honorable and useful members bought 
their seats as the only way of getting into Parliament on an inde- 
pendent basis, though they utterly detested the system. Thus at 
that time a considerable majority of the members of the House of 
Commons was returned through the influence of a small body of 
men who at the same time controlled the other House. 

There were some boroughs with a fairly large or even democratic 
electorate. Here bribery was resorted to by the rich, which was 
easily possible and greatly encouraged by the fact that the polls were 
kept open for fifteen days. On the other hand there were large cities 
like Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield, which had no unrepre- 
representation at all in the House of Commons, although they sented cities 
had a population of seventy-five or a hundred thousand or more. 
Well might the younger Pitt exclaim : "This House is not the repre- 
sentation of the people of Great Britain ; it is the representation of 
nominal boroughs of ruined and exterminated towns, of noble families, 
of wealthy individuals, of foreign potentates." The government of 
England was not representative, but was oligarchical. 

Closely identified with the State, and, like the State, thoroughly 
permeated with the principle of special privileges, was another body, 
the Church of England. Though there was absolute reli- .^j^^ 
gious liberty in Great Britain, though men might worship as Established 
they saw fit, the position of the Anglican Church was one 
greatly favored. Only members of that church possessed any real 
political power. No Catholic could be a member of Parliament, or 
hold any office in the state or municipality. In theory Protestants 
who dissented from the Anglican Church were likewise excluded from 
holding office. In practice, however, they were enabled to, by the 
device of the so-called Act of Indemnity, an act passed each year by 
Parliament, pardoning them for having held the positions illegally 
during the year just past. The position of the Dissenter was both 
burdensome and humiliating. He had to pay taxes for the ^. 

^ ' -^ Dissenters 

support of the Church of England, though he did not belong 
to it. He had to register his place of worship with authorities of the 
Church of England. He could only be married by a clergyman of 
that church, unless he were a Quaker or a Jew. There was no such 
thing as civil marriage, or marriage by dissenting clergymen. A 
Roman Catholic or a Dissenter could not graduate from Cambridge, 



344 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

could not even enter Oxford, owing to the religious tests exacted, 
which only Anglicans could meet. The natural result of the suprem- 
acy of this church was that those entered it who were influenced 
by self-interest, who were ambitious for political preferment, for 
social advancement, or for an Oxford or Cambridge education for 
their sons. It was " ungentlemanlike " to be a Dissenter. 

The great institutions of England, therefore, were controlled by the 
rich, and in the interest of the rich. Legislation favored the powerful, 
the landed nobility, and the wealthy class of manufacturers that was 
growing up, whose interests were similar. The immense mass of 
The people the people received scant consideration. Their education was 
neglected woefuUy neglected. Probably three-fourths of the children of 
England did not receive the slightest instruction. Laborers were for- 
bidden to combine to improve their conditions, which the state itself 
never dreamed of improving. Even their food was made artificially 
dear by tariffs on breadstuffs passed in the interest of the landowners. 
The reverse side of the picture of English greatness and power and 
prosperity was gloomy in the extreme. England was in need of 
sweeping and numerous reforms to meet the demands of modern 
liberalism, whether in politics or economics or in social institutions. 
The demand for reform, checked by the Revolution and by the 
long struggle with France, was resumed after the final victory over 
Napoleon at Waterloo. It drew its main strength from the 
distress'^* deep and widespread wretchedness of the people. For, con- 
^'^^ trary to all expectations, peace did not bring happiness and 

prosperity, but rather intense suffering and hatred of class 
against class. Manufacturers were obliged to discharge thousands 
of workmen, because the demand for British goods fell off after the 
Lack of peace, owing to the resumption of manufacturing in the conti- 

empioyment ncntal countries. At the time when the number of laborers 
was greater than the demand, 200,000 or more men were added to 
the labor market by the reduction of the army and navy. Further- 
more, the next few years saw a series of bad harvests. By these and 
by the Corn Law of 1815, bread was made dearer. Add also the fact 
that the modem industrial or factory system was painfully sup- 
planting the old system of household industries and temporarily 
throwing multitudes out of employment, or employing them under 
hard, even inhuman conditions, and it is not difficult to understand 
the widespread, desperate discontent of the mass of the population. 



BEGINNINGS OF THE REFORM MOVEMENT 345 

Parliament, an organ of the rich minority, refused to help them ; it 
even forbade them to help themselves, for it was a misdemeanor for 
workmen to combine. If they did, they would be sent to jail. Labor 
was unorganized. 

AN ERA OF REFORMS 

The demand for reforms came primarily from the poor and dis- 
heartened masses, who possessed a remarkable leader in the person of 
William Cobbett, the son of an agricultural laborer. For wiiiiam 
some years Cobbett had published a liberal periodical called Cobbett 
" The Weekly Political Register,'' in which he had opposed the Govern- 
ment. In 1 8 16 he reduced the price of his paper from a shilling to 
twopence, made his appeal directl}^ to the laboring class, and became 
their guide and spokesman. The efifect was instantaneous. For the 
first time the lower class had an organ, cheap, moreover brilliantly 
written, for Cobbett's literary ability was such that a London paper, 
the Standard, declared that for clearness, force, and power of copious 
illustration he was unrivaled since the time of Swift. Cobbett was 
the first great popular editor, who for nearly thirty years, with but 
little interruption, expressed in his weekly paper the wishes and the 
emotions of the laboring classes. He was a great democratic leader, 
a powerful popular editor, a pugnacious and venomous opponent 
of the existing regime, a champion of the cause of parliamentary 
reform. 

For Cobbett persuaded the working people that they must first get 
the right to Vote before they could get social arid economic reforms. 
Parliamentary reform must have precedence. Let the people Pariiamen- 
get political power, let them change Parliament from the organ '^""y reform 
of a narrow class into a truly national assembly, and then they 
could abolish the evils from which they suffered, and put useful 
statutes into force. He demanded, therefore, universal suffrage. 
Other leaders appeared, also, and a considerable fermentation of 
ideas among the unpropertied and working classes characterized 
these years. 

But against these demands of the disinherited the Tory part}^ hard- 
ened its heart. Scenting in every popular movement a new French 
Revolution it made no attempt to study or remove grievances but 
was resolved to go to any length to stamp out the troublesome spirit 
of unrest by force. This period of sorry reaction culminated in the 



346 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, a grave measure which only 

the direst necessity could justify ; also in the passage of so-called Gag 

_ . Laws which stringently restricted the freedom of speech, of the 

Suspension . . . f i 

of Habeas press, and of public meeting and discussion which had long 

°^^^ been the boast of England. This period of harsh government, of 

repressive legislation, which encroached gravely upon the traditional 

liberties of the British people, lasted for about five years after 

Waterloo. 

In 1820 George III died at the age of eighty-one. He had for 
Death of many years been insane, and the regency had been exercised by 

George III j^jg ggn, who now became George IV and who reigned from 
1820 to 1830. 

After 1820 a change gradually came over the political life of Eng- 
land. The Tory party still maintained its great majority in Parlia- 
ment but several of the more reactionary members of the ministry 
died or resigned, and their places were taken by men of a younger 
and more liberal generation, particularly by Canning, Peel, and 
Huskisson, who were able to make the Tory party an engine of 
partial reform. Canning, as Foreign Secretary, freed England's 
foreign policy from all connection with the Holy Alliance. He boldly 
Defiance of asserted the doctrine that each nation is free to determine 
the Holy its own form of government, which doctrine was the direct 

opposite of that of Metternich. Huskisson's reforms were 
economic and aimed at the liberation of commerce, by removing 
some of the restrictions which had been thrown around the carrying 
trade, by reducing tariff duties on many articles of import, and by 
greatly simplifying the administration of the tariff system. 

Sir Robert Peel undertook at this time the reform of the Penal 

Code. That code was a disgrace to England and placed her far 

The Penal behind France and other countries. The punishment of death 

Code re- could be legally inflicted for about two hundred offenses — 

°^^^ for picking pockets, for stealing five shillings from a store, 

or forty shillings from a dwelling house, for stealing a fish, for injuring 

Westminster Bridge, for sending threatening letters. In 1823 the 

death penalty was abolished in about a hundred cases. 

Another reform of these years lay in the direction of greater reli- 
gious liberty. The disabilities from which Protestant dissenters 
suffered were removed in 1828 by the abrogation of the requirement 
that all office holders should take the sacrament according to the 



PARLIAMENTARY REFORM 347 

rites of the Church of England and should make a declaration 
against the doctrine of transubstantiation. In the following year, 
after a long and bitter controversy which went to the very . , ... , 
verge of civil war, Parliament redressed the grievances of the religious 
Catholics by the passage of the Catholic Emancipation Act '^^^^^'^les 
which permitted Catholics henceforth to sit in either house of Parlia- 
ment and to hold, with a few exceptions, any municipal or 
national office. This act established real political equality be- emancipation 
tween Catholics and Protestants. 

The reforms that have just been described were carried through by 
the Tory party. There was one reform, however, more fundamental 
and important, which it was clear that that party would never Tory oppo- 
concede, the reform of Parliament itself. The significant reform*o/^^ 
features of the parliamentary system have already been de- Parliament 
scribed. That they required profound alteration had been held 
by many of the Whigs for more than fifty years. But the Whigs 
had been powerless to effect anything, having long been in the 
minority. A combination of circumstances, however, now brought 
about 'the downfall of the party so long dominant, and rendered pos- 
sible the great reform. George IV died on June 26, 1830, and was 
succeeded by his brother William IV (1830- 1837). The death of 
the monarch necessitated a new election of Parliament. The election 
resulted in a Tory loss of fifty members in the House of Commons. 
The Duke of Wellington was shortly forced to resign and the Whigs 
came in. Thus was broken the control the Tory party had exercised, 
with one slight interruption, for forty-six years. 

THE FIRST REFORM BILL 

Earl Grey, who for forty years had demanded parliamentary re- 
form, now became prime minister. A ministry was formed with ease, 
and included many able men — Durham, Russell, Brougham, jntj-o^uced 
Palmerston, Stanley, Melbourne — and on March i, 1831, a by Lord John 
Reform Bill was introduced in the House of Commons by Lord "^^^ ' 
John Russell. It aimed to effect a redistribution of seats on a more 
equitable plan, and the establishment of a uniform franchise for 
boroughs in place of the great and absurd variety of franchises then 
existing. The redistribution of seats was based on two principles, 
the withdrawal of the right of representation from small, decayed 



348 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 




Passing of the Reform Bill in the House of Lords 
From an engraving after the painting by Sir Joshua Reynolds 



THE FIRST REFORM BILL 349 

boroughs and its bestowal upon large and wealthy towns hitherto 
without it. 

The bill amazed the House by its comprehensive character and 
encouraged the reformers. Neither side had expected so sweeping a 
change. The introduction of the bill precipitated a remarkable par- 
liamentary discussion, which continued with some intervals for over 
fifteen months, from March i, 1831, to June 5, 1832. 

Lord John Russell in his introduction of the measure, after stating 
that the theory of the British Constitution was no taxation without 
representation, and after showing that in former times Parliament had 
been truly representative, said that it was no longer so. "A stranger 
who was told that this country is unparalleled in wealth and in- 
dustry, and more civilized and more enlightened than any RusseU's 
country was before it — that it is a country that prides itself ^^^^'^^ 
on its freedom, and that once in every seven years it elects represent- 
atives from its population to act as the guardians and preservers 
of that freedom — would be anxious and curious to see how that 
representation is formed, and how the people choose their repre- 
sentatives, to whose faith and guardianship they intrust their free 
and liberal institutions. Such a person would be very much aston- 
ished if he were taken to a ruined mound and told that the mound 
sent two representatives to Parliament ; if he were taken to a stone 
wall and told that three niches in it sent two representatives to 
Parliament ; if he were taken to a park where no houses were to be 
seen, and told that that park sent two representatives to Parliament. 
But if he were told all this, and were astonisVied at hearing it, he 
would be still more astonished if he were to see large and opulent 
towns, full of enterprise and industry and intelligence, containing 
vast magazines of every species of manufactures, and were then told 
that these towns sent no representatives to Parliament." 

This speech inaugurated a resounding and a bitter debate. Oppo- 
nents of the measure flatly denied that the population of a town had 
ever had anything to do with its representation or that rep- Arguments 
resentation and taxation were in any way connected in the agafn'^st 
British Constitution. They said that some of the greatest the bui 
men in parliamentary annals had entered the House of Commons as 
the representatives of these nomination and rotten boroughs now 
30 vigorously denounced, — which was true, as the cases of the 
younger Pitt, Burke, Canning, Fox, and others showed. To which 



350 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

Macaulay retorted that "we must judge of the form of government 
by its general tendency, not by happy accidents," and that if "there 
were a law that the hundred tallest men in England should be mem- 
bers of Parliament, there would probably be some able men among 
those who would come into the House by virtue of this law." 

Thus the debate went on, an unusual number of members partici- 
pating. But the bill did not have long to live. The Opposi- 
defea^ted, tion was persistent, and on April 19 the ministry was defeated 
Parliament qj-j ^j-j amendment. It resolved to appeal to the people. Par- 

dissolved ^ ^ x- r- 

liament was dissolved and a new election ordered. This elec- 
tion took place in the summer of 1831 amid the greatest excitement 
and was one of the most momentous of the century. From one end of 
the land to the other the cry was, "The bill, the whole bill, and 
nothing but the bill." There was some violence and intimidation 
of voters, and bribery on a large scale was practiced on both sides. 
The question put the candidates was, "Will you support the bill or 
will you oppose it ? " The result of the election was an overwhelming 
victory for the reformers. 



SECOND REFORM BILL 

On June 24, 1831, Lord John Russell introduced the second Reform 
Bill, which was practically the same as the first. The Opposition did 
not yield, but fought it inch by inch. They tried to wear out the 
ministry by making dilatory motions and innumerable speeches 
which necessarily consisted of mere repetition. In the course of 
two weeks Sir Robert Peel spoke forty-eight times, Croker fifty- 
Defeated b seven times, Wetherell fifty-eight. However, the bill was 
the House of finally passed, September 22, by a majority of 106. It was 
then sent up to the House of Lords where it was quickly 
killed (October 8, 1831). 

It was the Lords who chiefly profited by the existing system of 
nomination and rotten boroughs, and they were enraged at the 
proposal to end it. They were determined not to lose the power 
it gave them. 

The defeat of the bill by the Upper House caused great indignation 
throughout the country. Apparently the Lords were simply greedy 
of their privileges. Again riots broke out in London and other towns, 
expressive of the popular feeling. Newspapers appeared in mourn- 



PASSAGE OF THE REFORM BILL 351 

ing. Bells were tolled. Threats of personal violence to the Lords 
were made, and in certain instances carried out. Troops were called 
out in some places. England, it was widely felt, was on the brink of 
civil war. 

THIRD REFORM BILL 

Parliament was now prorogued. It reassembled December 6th, 
and on the 12th Lord John Russell rose again and introduced his 
third Reform Bill. Again the same tiresome tactics of the Opposition. 
But the bill finally passed the House of Commons, March 23, 1832, 
by a majority of 116. 

Again the bill was before the Lords, who showed the same disposi- 
tion to defeat it as before. The situation seemed hopeless. Twice 
the Commons had passed the bill with the manifest and express 
approval of the people. Were they to be foiled by a chamber based 
on hereditary privilege? Riots, monster- demonstrations, acrimo- 
nious and bitter denunciation, showed once more the temper of the 
people. There was one way only in which the measure could be 
carried.' The King might create enough new peers to give its sup- 
porters a majority in the House of Lords. This, however, William IV 
at first refused to do. The Grey ministry consequently resigned. 
The King appealed to the Duke of Wellington to form a ministry. 
The Duke tried but failed. The King then gave way, recalled 
Earl Grey to power and signed a paper stating, "The King grants 
permission to Earl Grey and to his Chancellor, Lord Brougham 
(bro'-am), to create such a number of peers as will be sufficient to 
insure the passing of the Reform Bill." These peers were never The bui 
created. The threat sufficed. The bill passed the Lords, June passed 
4, 1832, about 100 of its opponents absenting themselves from the 
House. It was signed and became a law. 

The bill had undergone some changes during its passage. In its 
final form it provided that fifty-six nomination or close boroughs with 
a population of less than 2,000 should lose their representation 
entirely ; that thirty-two others with a population of less than 4,000 
should lose one member each. The seats thus obtained were redis- 
tributed as follows : twenty- two large towns were given two Rejjstnbu. 
members each ; twenty other were given one each, and the tion of 
larger counties were given additional members, sixty-five in ^***^ 
all. There was no attempt to make equal electoral districts, but 



352 AN ERA OF REFORIM IN ENGLAND 

only to remove more flagrant abuses. Constituencies still differed 
greatly in population. 

The Reform Bill also altered and widened the suffrage. Previously 
the county franchise had depended entirely upon the ownership of 
The county ^^T^d ; that is, was limited to those who owned outright land of 
franchise a,n annual value of forty shillings, the forty-shilling free-holders. 
The county suffrage was now extended to include, under certain 
conditions, those who leased land. Thus in the counties the suffrage 
was dependent still upon the tenure of land, but not upon outright 
ownership. 

In the boroughs a far greater change was made. The right to vote 

was given to all ten-pound householders, which meant all who owned 

.pjjg or rented a house or shop or other building of an annual rental 

borough value, with the land, of ten pounds. Thus the suffrage was 

practically given in boroughs to the wealthier middle class. 

There was henceforth a uniform suffrage in boroughs, and a diversified 

suffrage in counties. 

The Reform Bill of 1832 was not a democratic measure, but it made 

the House of Commons a truly representative body. It admitted to 

the suffrage the wealthier middle class. The number of voters, 

particularly in the boroughs, was considerably increased ; but the 

laborers of England had no votes, nor had the poorer middle class. 

The average ratio of voters to the whole population of Great Britain 

Not a ^^^ about one to thirty. The measure, therefore, though 

democratic regarded as final by the Whig ministry, was not so regarded by 

^^ the vast majority, who were still disfranchised. No further 

alteration was made until 1867, but during the whole intervening 

period there was a demand for extension. In 1831 and 1832 the 

people, by their monster meetings, riots, acts of violence, had helped 

greatly to pass the bill only to find when the struggle was over that 

others and not themselves had profited by their efforts. 



OTHER REFORMS BY THE WHIG GOVERNMENT 

The reforming activity of the Whigs, which had achieved the 
notable triumph of the great change in the House of Commons, con- 
tinued unabated for several years. Several measures of great im- 
portance were passed by the reformed Parliament during the next 
few years. 



ABOLITION OF SLAVERY 353 

One of the first of these was the aboUtion of slavery in 1833. It had 
been long held by the British courts that slavery could not exist in the 
British Isles, that the instant a slave touched the soil of England he 
became free. But slavery itself existed in the West Indies, in Mau- 
ritius, and in South Africa. There were about 750,000 slaves slavery in - 
in these colonies. To free them was a difficult matter for it was *^® colonies 
considered an interference with the rights of property, and it might 
ruin the prosperity of the colonies. But there was a growing sensi- 
tiveness to the moral iniquity of the institution and it was this that 
ultimately insured the success of the anti-slavery agitation ably led 
by Wilberforce and Zachary IVIacaulay, father of the historian. A 
bill was passed in August, 1833, decreeing that slavery should cease 
August I, 1834, and appropriating a hundred million dollars as 
compensation to the slave owners for the loss of their property. 
The slave owners were not satisfied, considering the sum insufficient, 
but were obliged to acquiesce. 

Conscience was aroused at the same time by a cruel evil right at 
home, the employment, under barbarous conditions, of children in 
factories. The employment of child labor in British industries 
was one of the results of the rise of the modem factory system. 
It was early seen that much of the work done by machinery could 
be carried on by children, and as their labor was cheaper than that 
of adults they were swept into the factories in larger and larger 
numbers, and a monstrous evil grew up. They were, of course, the 
children of the poorest people. Many began this life of misery at 
the age of five or six, more at the age of eight or nine. Incredible as 
it may seem, they were often compelled to work twelve or fourteen 
hours a day. Half hour intervals were allowed for meals, but by a 
refinement of cruelty they were expected to clean the machinery 
at such times. Falling asleep at their work they were beaten by 
overseers or injured by falling against the machinery. In this in- 
human regime there was no time or strength left for education or 
recreation or healthy development of any kind. The moral atmos- 
phere in which the children worked was harmful in the extreme. 
Physically, intellectually, morally, the result could only be stunted 
human beings. 

This monstrous system was defended by political economists, 
manufacturers, and statesmen in the name of individual liberty, in 
whose name, moreover, crimes have often been committed, the liberty 



354 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

of the manufacturer to conduct his business without interference 
from outside, the hberty of the laborer to sell his labor under what- 
The system ever conditions he might be disposed or, as might more prop- 
defended gj-iy \yQ said, compelled to accept. A Parliament, however, 
which had been so sensitive to the wrongs of negro slaves in Jamaica, 
could not be indifferent to the fate of English children. 

Thus the long efforts of many English humanitarians, Robert Owen, 
Thomas Sadler, Fielden, Lord Ashley, resulted in the passage of the 
Factory Act of 1833, which prohibited the employment in 
A^^ ^^*8°'^ spinning and weaving factories of children under nine, made a 
maximum eight-hour day for those from nine to thirteen, and 
of twelve for those from thirteen to eighteen. This was a very 
modest beginning, yet it represented a great advance on the preceding 
policy of England. It was the first of a series of acts regulating the 
conditions of laborers in the interests of society as a whole, acts 
which have become more numerous, more minute, and more drastic 
from 1833 to the present day. The idea that an employer may con- 
duct his business entirely as he likes has no standing in modern 
English law. 

LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT 

The reform spirit, which rendered the decade from 1830 to 1840 so 
notable, achieved another vast improvement in the radical trans- 
The decay formation of municipal government. The local self-govern- 
seif°*^overn ^lent of England enjoyed great fame abroad but was actually 
ment in a very sorry condition at home. Not only was the Parlia- 

ment of 1830 the organ of an oligarchy, but so was the system of 
local government. 

Municipal government was in the hands of small groups. Thus 

in Cambridge, with a population of 20,000, there were only 118 

voters ; in Portsmouth, with 46,000, only 102. In very nu- 

The neces- ' > -r > > -» .' 

sityfor merous cases the situation was even worse and local govern- 

reform ment was in the hands of the corporation, that is, the mayor 

and the common council. The mayor was chosen by the council 
and the councilors held office for life and had the right to fill all 
vacancies in their body. These governments were notoriously 
corrupt and notoriously inefficient. Generally speaking, those 
Englishmen who lived in boroughs were not only not self-governed 
but were wretchedly misgoverned. 



BEGINNING OF THE VICTORIAN ERA 



355 



In 1835 a law was passed which provided for the election of town 
councilors by all the inhabitants who had paid taxes during the 
preceding three years. The council was to elect the mayor. 
It is estimated that about two million people thus secured the of municipal 
municipal vote. This was not democracy, but it was a long government 
step toward it, and away from oligarchy. The suffrage has been 
widened since 1835. 



ACCESSION OF QUEEN VICTORIA 

In the midst of this period of reform occurred a change in the occu- 
pancy of the throne. King William IV died June 20, 1837, and was 
succeeded by his niece, Vic- 
toria. The young Queen was 
the daughter of the Duke of 
Kent, fourth son of George III. 
She was, at the time of her ac- 
cession, eighteen years of age. 
She had been carefully edu- 
cated, but owing to the fact 
that William IV disliked her 
mother, she had seen very 
little of court life, and was 
very little known. Carlyle, 
oppressed with all the weary 
weight of this unintelligible 
world, pitied her, quite unnec- 
essarily. ' ' Poor little Queen ! ' ' 
said he, "she is at an age at 
which a girl can hardly be 
trusted to choose a bonnet for 
herself ; yet a task is laid upon 
her from which an archangel 
might shrink." Not such was 
the mood of the Queen. She 
was buoyant and joyous, and 
entered with zest upon a reign 
which was to prove the longest 
in the annals of England. She 




Qtxeen Victoria, at the Age of 20 

After the painting by Sir Edwin Landseer at 
Windsor Castle. 



356 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

impressed all who saw her with her dignity and poise. Her political 
education was conducted under the guidance, first of Leopold, King of 
„ Belgium, her uncle, and after her accession, of Lord Melbourne, 

political both of whom instilled in her mind the principles of constitu- 

e ucation tional monarchy. The question of her marriage was important 
and was decided by herself. Summoning her cousin, Prince Albert of 
Saxe-Coburg, into her presence, she offered him her hand — "a 
nervous thing to do," as she afterward said, yet the only thing as 
"he would never have presumed to take such a liberty" himself as to 
ask for the hand of the Queen of England. It was a marriage of 
affection. "She is as full of love as Juliet," said Sir Robert Peel. Her 
married life was exceptionally happy, and when the Prince Consort 
died twenty-one years later, she was inconsolable. During these 
years he was her constant adviser, and so complete was the harmony 
of their views that he was practically quite as much the ruler of the 
country as was she. 

THE PEOPLE'S CHARTER 

As the Reform Bill of 1832 had given the suffrage only to the upper 

part of the middle classes, ^as it excluded the working classes whether 

in town or country from all political power, it was only natural 

further par- that the latter should refuse to consider it a finality and should 

liamentary agitate for the extension of the suffrage to themselves, par- 
reform o 7 j- 

ticularly as they had helped decidedly to pass the great meas- 
ure. Therefore the workingmen conducted a vehement agitation 
for several years to secure the rights to which they felt they were 
as entitled as were th6s'e who were fortunate enough to be richer than 
they. In a pamphlet entitled The Rotteti House of Commons (De- 
cember, 1836), Lovett, one of their leaders, proved from official 
returns that, out of 6,023,752 adult males living in the United King- 
dom, only 839,519 were voters. He also showed that despite the 
reform of 1832 there were great inequalities among the constituencies, 
that twenty members were chosen by 2,411 votes, twenty more by 
86,072. The immediate demands of the Radicals were expressed in 
"The People's Charter," or program, a petition to Parliament 
drawn up in 1838. They demanded that the right to vote be given 
to every adult man, declaring, "We perform the duties of freemen, we 
must have the privileges of freemen" ; that voting be secret, by 



THE CHARTIST MOVEMENT 357 

ballot rather than orally as was then the custom, so that every voter 
could be free from intimidation, and less exposed to bribery ; that 
property qualifications for membership in the House be abol- 
ished ; and that the members receive salaries so that poor men, chartists' 
laborers themselves and understanding the needs of labor- ^^^ 
ers, might be elected to Parliament if the voters wished. 
They also demanded that the House of Commons should be elected, 
not for seven years, as was then the law, but simply for one year. 
The object of this was to prevent their representatives from mis- 
representing them by proving faithless to their pledges or indifferent 
or hostile to the wishes of the voters. Annual elections would give 
the voters the chance to punish such representatives speedily by 
electing others in their place. "The connection between the repre- 
sentatives and the people, to be beneficial, must be intimate," said 
the petition. Such were the five points of the famous Charter 
designed to make Parliament representative of the people, not of a 
class. Once adopted, it was felt that the masses would secure control 
of the legislature and could then improve their conditions. 

The Chartists had almost no influence in Parliament, and their agi- 
tation had consequently to be carried on outside in workingmen's 
associations, in the cheap press, in popular songs and poems, in 
monster meetings addressed by impassioned orators, in numer- 
ous and unprecedentedly large petitions. One of these pe- the Chartist 
titions was presented in 1839. It was in the form of a large *s"**""^ 
cylinder of parchment about four feet in diameter, and was said to 
have been signed by 1,286,000 persons. It was summarily rejected. 
Notwithstanding this failure another was presented in 1842, signed, it 
was asserted, by over three million persons. Borne through the 
streets of London in a great procession it was found too large to be 
carried through the door of the House of Commons. It was tnerefore 
cut up into several parts and deposited on the floor. This, too, was 
rejected. 

In 1848 another attempt was made. Encouraged by the French 
Revolution of that year the Chartists held a great national convention 
or people's parliament in London, and planned a vast demonstration 
on behalf of the Charter. Half a million men were to accompany a 
new petition to Parliament, which it was expected would be overawed 
and would then yield to so imposing a demand of an insistent people. 
The Government was so alarmed that it intrusted the safety of 



358 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

London to the Duke of Wellington, then seventy-nine years of age. 
His arrangements were made with his accustomed thoroughness. 
One hundred and seventy thousand special constables were enrolled, 
one of whom was Louis Napoleon, who before the year was out was 
to be President of the French Republic. The result was that the 
street demonstration was a failure, and the petition, examined by a 
committee of the House, was found to contain, not 5,706,000 signa- 
tures, as asserted, but less than two million. It was summarily 
rejected. The Chartist agitation finally died out owing to ridicule, 
internal quarrels, but particularly because of the growing prosperity 
of the country, which resulted from the abolition of the Corn Laws 
and the adoption of Free Trade. 

It is difficult to appraise the value and significance of this move- 
ment. Judged superficially and by immediate results the Chartists 
^, . .^ failed completely. Yet most of the changes they advocated 

The signifi- , , , 

cance of the have since been brought about. There are now no property 
movement qualifications for members of the House of Commons, and the 
secret ballot has been secured ; the suffrage is now enjoyed by 
practically all men and by several million women ; members now 
receive salaries, and Parliaments are now elected for five years. It 
seems that some of the tremendous impetus of England toward 
democracy, which grew so marked toward the close of the nineteenth 
century, was derived from this movement of the Chartists. 



REPEAL OF THE CORN LAWS, — FREE TRADE 

Simultaneously with the Chartist movement another was going on 
which had a happier issue. The adoption of the principle of free 
trade must always remain a great event in English history, and was 
•the culmination of a remarkable agitation that extended over forty 
years, though its most decisive phase was concentrated into a few 
years of intense activity. The change was complete from a policy 
which England in common with the rest of the world had followed for 
centuries and which other countries still follow. 

England had long believed in protection. Hundreds of articles 

were subject to duties as they entered the country, manufac- 

poiicy of tured articles, raw materials. The most important single in- 

protection tcrest among all those protected was agriculture. Com is a 

word used in England to describe wheat and breadstuffs generally. 



THE FREE TRADE MOVEMEIsTT 



359 



The laws imposing duties on corn were the keystone of the whole system 
of protection. The advocates of free trade necessarily, therefore, 
delivered their fiercest assaults upon the Corn Laws. If xhe Corn 
these could be overthrown it was believed that the whole ^^^^ 
system would fall. But for a long while the landlord class was so in- 
■ trenched in political power that the law remained impregnable. The 
manufacturers and the merchants, however, were in favor of free trade, 

as the only way of enlarging 
the foreign market of England 
and thus keeping English 
factories running and English 
workingmen employed. But 
foreigners would buy English 
goods only if they might pay 
for them in their own com- 
modities, their grain, their 
lumber. Again, as the popu- 
lation was increasing, England 
needed cheaper food. In 1 839 
there was founded in Man- 
chester, a great manufactur- 
ing center, the Anti-Corn- Law 
League whose leader was Richard 
Richard Cobden, a sue- Cobden and 
cessful and traveled Com-Law 
young business man. ^^^s"® 
He was soon joined by John 
Bright, like himself a manufacturer, unlike him one of the great popu- 
lar orators of the nineteenth century. The methods of the League 
were businesslike and thorough. Its campaign was one of per- 
suasion. It distributed a vast number of pamphlets, sent out a 
corps of speakers to deliver lectures, setting forth the leading 
arguments in favor of free trade. Year after year this process of 
argumentation went on. It was an earnest and sober attempt to 
convince Englishmen that they should completely reverse ^j^^ j^. 
their commercial policy in the interest of their own prosper- famine of 
ity. But it does not seem that this agitation would have sue- ' '^^ 
ceeded in securing the repeal of the Corn Laws had it not been for a 
great natural calamity, the Irish famine of 1845. The food of the vast 




Richard Cobden 



36o AN "ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

majority of the Irish people was the potato. More than half of the 
eight million inhabitants of Ireland depended upon it alone for sus- 
tenance and with a large part of the rest it was the chief article of 
diet. Now this crop completely failed, owing to a disease that had 
_ , , set in. Famine came and tens of thousands perished from 

Repeal of ^ 

the Corn starvation. The only way to rescue the population was to 

*^^ repeal the Corn Laws and thus let in the food supplies of the 

Continent, to take the place of the bhghted potato. In 1846, under 

this tremendous pressure, Sir Robert Peel carried against bitter 

opposition the repeal of the Corn Laws. There still remained after 

Remaining this many duties in the English tariff, but the keystone of the 

protective whole systcm of protection was removed. One after another 

duties grad- , . , , .... 

uaUy durmg the next twenty years the remauimg duties were 

removed removed. England still has a tariff but it is for revenue only, 

not for the protection of English industries. Nearly all of the 
revenue from the present tariff comes from the duties on tobacco, 
tea, spirits, wine, and sugar, mostly commodities not produced in 
England. England is absolutely dependent upon other countries 
for her food supplies. 



LABOR LEGISLATION 

The twenty years succeeding the repeal of the Corn Laws were 
years of quiescence and transition. Comparatively few changes of 
importance were made in legislation. Those of greatest significance 
•concerned the regulation of employment in factories and mines. 
Such legislation, merciful in its immediate effects and momentous in 
the reach of the principles on which it rested, was enacted particu- 
larly during the decade from 1840 to 1850. The initial step in such 
legislation had been taken in the Factory Act of 1833, already de- 
scribed, a law that regulated somewhat the conditions under which 
children and women could be employed in the textile industries. 
But labor was unprotected in many other industries, in which gross 
abuses prevailed. One of the most famous parliamentary reports 
of the nineteenth century was that of a commission appointed to 
R lation investigate the conditions in mines. Published in 1842, its 
of labor amazing revelations revolted public opinion and led to quick 

inmmes action. It showcd that children of five, six, seven years of 

age were employed underground in coal mines, girls as well as boys ; 



FACTORY LAWS 



^6 1 



that women as well as men labored under conditions fatal to health 
and morals ; that the hours were long, twelve or fourteen a day, 
and the dangers great. They were veritable beasts of burden, 
dragging and pushing carts on hands and knees along narrow and 
low passageways, in which it was impossible to stand erect. Girls 
of eight or ten carried heavy buckets of coal on their backs up steep 

ladders many times a 
day. The revelations of 
this report were so as- 
tounding and sickening 
that a law was passed in 
1842 which forbade the 
employment of women 
and girls in mines, and 
which permitted the em- 
ployment of boys of ten 
for only three days a 
week. 

Once embarked on this 
policy of protecting the 
economically dependent 
classes. Parliament was 
forced to go farther and 
farther in the gov- Factory 
ernmental regula- ^*^^ 
tiori of private industry. 
It has enacted a long 
series of statutes which 
it is here impossible to 
John Bright describe, so extensive 

and minute are their 
provisions. The series is being constantly lengthened. 

In these various acts of legislation just described and in other ways 
England showed during these middle years of the century that she was 
outgrowing old forms of thought and organization and was evidently 
tending more and more toward democracy. Yet this general trend 
was not mirrored in her political life and institutions. Parlia-- 
ment remained what the Reform Bill of 1832 had made it. From 
1832 to 1867 there was no alteration either in the franchise or in 




362 



AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 



suffrage 



the distribution of seats in the House of Commons. This was the 
era of middle class rule, as its predecessor had been one of aristo- 
cratic rule. 

EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE 

But during this period the demand was frequently made that the 

suffrage be extended. At that time not more than one man in six had 

Th d mand ^^^ right to vote — Only "the ten-pound householders." In 

for a wider 1 866, to meet the growing demand, Gladstone, leader of the 

House of Commons under the Earl Russell ministry, proposed 

a moderate extension of the suffrage. The very moderation sealed its 

doom, as it aroused no enthusiasm among the people. There was no 

sign that the people wanted 
this measure and therefore the 
Conservatives, joined by many 
Liberals, joyously killed it. 
The ministry thereupon re- 
signed and Lord Derby became 
prime minister, with Disraeli 
(diz-ra'-li) the leading member 
of the cabinet. The Conserva- 
tives were once more in power, 
and the opponents of reform 
thought that they had effec- 
tually stemmed the advance 
toward democracy. Never were 
politicians more completely de- 
ceived. The rejection of even 
this modest measure aroused 
the people to indignation. 
Gladstone lost all his timidity 
and became a fiery apostle of 
an extensive reform. "You 
cannot fight against the future; time is on our side" was a Glad- 
stonian phrase that now became a battle cry. John Bright, with 
ill-concealed menace, incited the people to renew the scenes of 1832. 
Great popular demonstrations of the familiar kind occurred in favor 
of the bill. The people were manifestly in earnest. 

Seeing this, and feeling that reform was inevitable, and that, such 




Sir Robert Peel 
After painting by John Linnell. 



THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT 



363 




364 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND 

being the case, the Conservative party might as well reap the advan- 
tages of granting it as to allow those advantages to accrue to others, 
Disraeli in the following year, 1867, introduced a Reform 
carried by Bill. This was remodeled almost entirely by the Liberals, 
^8^^^'' "^ who, led by Gladstone, defeated the proposals of the ministry 
time after time, and succeeded in having their own prin- 
ciples incorporated in the measure. The bill as finally passed was 
. largely the work of Gladstone, practically everything he asked 
being in the end conceded, but it was the audacity and subtlety and 
resourcefulness of Disraeli that succeeded in getting a very radical 
bill adopted by the very same legislators who the year before had 
rejected a moderate one. 

The bill, as finally passed in August, 1867, closed the rule of the 
middle class in England, and made England a democracy. The 
Provisions franchise in boroughs was given to all householders. Thus, 
of the bui instead of ten-pound householders, all householders, whatever 
the value of their houses, were admitted ; also, all lodgers who had 
occupied for a year lodgings of the value, unfurnished, of ten pounds, 
or about a dollar a week. In the counties the suffrage was given to 
all those who owned property yielding five pounds clear income a 
year, rather than ten pounds, as previously ; and to all "occupiers" 
who paid at least twelve pounds, rather than fifty pounds, as hitherto. 
Thus the better class of laborers in the boroughs, and practically 
all tenant farmers in the counties, received the vote. By this bill 
the number of voters was nearly doubled. 

So sweeping was the measure that the prime minister himself. Lord 
Derby, called it a "leap in the dark." Carlyle, forecasting a dismal 
future, called it "shooting Niagara." Robert Lowe, whose memo- 
rable attacks had been largely instrumental in defeating the meager 
measure of the year before, now said, "we must educate our masters." 
It should be noted that during the debates on this bill, John Stuart 
Mill made a strongly reasoned speech in favor of granting the suf- 
frage to women. The House considered the proposition -highly 
humorous. Nevertheless this movement, then in its very beginning, 
was destined to persist and grow. 



REFERENCES 365 

REFERENCES 

The Old Parliamentary System : Ilbert, Parliament (Home University 
Library), pp. 33-47 ; May, Constitutional History of England, Vol. I, Chap. VI; 
Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 538-548 ; Seignobos, Political 
History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 10-18. 

Reform Bill of 1832 : McCarthy, Epoch of Reform, pp. 12-83 J Beard, pp. 
549-565; Rose, Rise of Democracy, pp. 9-52; Cheyney, Readings in English 
History, pp. 679-690; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European 
History, Vol. II, pp. 239-245. 

Chartism : Rose, pp. 84-146 ; McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. I, 
Chaps. V and XVIII. 

Free Trade Movement : McCarthy, History of Our Oivn Times, Vol. I, 
Chaps. XIV-XVI; McCarthy, Life of Peel, Chaps. XII and XIII; Cheyney, 
pp. 708-715. 

Queen Victoria's Early Life : Lee, Life of Queen Victoria, pp. 1-98. 

The Youth of Disr.-veli : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. I, 
Chap. XVI. 

Reform Bill of 1867 : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. II, 
Chaps. .L-LII. 



CHAPTER XVII 

REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

THE REIGN OF LOUIS XVIII 

The House of Bourbon had been put back upon the throne of 

France by the AlUes who had conquered Napoleon in 1814. It was 

put back a second time in 18 15, after Waterloo. But the new 

The restora- ^ , ,-, , a,i- i i 

tionof the monarch, Louis XVIII, recognized, as did the Allies, that the 

not'a''°eTtora- restoration of the royal line did not at all mean the restoration 

tion of the of the Old Regime. He saw that the day of the absolute 

egime ^lonarchy had passed forever in France. The monarchy 

must be constitutional and must safeguard many of the acquisitions 

of the Revolution or its life would certainly be brief. The King, 

recognizing that he must compromise with the spirit of the age, 

issued in 18 14 the Constitutional Charter. This established 

stitutionai ^ parliament of two houses, a Chamber of Peers, appointed 

Charter of fQj- {[^q^ ^^d a Chamber of Deputies, elected for a term of 

five years, but by a restricted body of voters, for the suffrage 

was so limited by age and property qualifications that there were 

less than 100,000 voters out of a population of 29,000,000, and that 

not more than 12,000 were eligible to become deputies. The Charter 

proclaimed the equality of all Frenchmen, yet only a petty minority 

was given the right to participate in the government of the country. 

France was still in a political sense a land of privilege, only privilege 

was no longer based on birth but on fortune. Nevertheless, this 

was a more liberal form of government than she had ever had under 

Napoleon, and was the most liberal to be seen in Europe, outside of 

England. 

There was another set of provisions in this document of even 
greater importance than those determining the future form of govern- 
ment, namely, that in which the civil rights of Frenchmen were 
narrated. These provisions showed how much of the work of the 

366 



THE RESTORATION AND THE REVOLUTION '367 



Revolution and of Napoleon the Bourbons were prepared to accept. 
They were intended to reassure the people of France, who feared 
to see in the Restoration a loss of liberties or rights which „ . . 

° Provisions 

had become most precious to them. It was declared that all concerning 
Frenchmen were equal before the law, and thus the cardinal ^^""^ "^^'^ 
principle of the Revolution was preserved ; that all were equally 
eligible to civil and military- positions, that thus no class should 
monopolize public service, as had largely been the case before Recognition 

the Revolution; that T^Ult 
no one should be ar- lution 
rested or prosecuted save by 
due process of law, that thus 
the day of arbitrary im- 
prisonment was not to re- 
turn ; that there should be 
complete religious freedom 
for all sects, although Roman 
Catholicism was declared to 
be the religion of the state ; 
that the press should be free. 
Those who had purchased 
the confiscated property of 
the crown, the church, and 
the nobles, during the Revo- 
lution, were assured that 
their titles were inviolable. 

The personality of Louis 
XVIII seemed admirably 
adapted to the situa- Louis xviii 
tion in which France (1814-1824) 
found itself. A man of moderate opinions, cold-blooded, skeptical, 
free from illusions, free from the passion of revenge, indolent by 
nature, Louis desired to avoid conflicts and to enjoy his power 
in peace. But there were difficulties in the way. He had been 
restored by foreign armies. His presence' on the throne was a 
constant reminder of the humiliation of France. But a more 
serious feature was the character of the persons with whom he 
was in constant contact. The court was now composed of the 
nobles who had suffered greatly from the Revolution, who had 




Loll-, X\ 111 

From an engraving by P. Audouin, after the 
bust by A. Valois. 



368- REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

been robbed of their property, who had seen many of their rela- 
tives executed by the guillotine. It was but natural that these 
men should have come back full of hatred for the authors of their 
woes, that they should detest the ideas of the Revolution and the 
persons who had been identified with it. These men were not 
free from passion, as was Louis XVIII. More eager to restore the 
former glory of the crown, the former rank of the nobility and the 
clergy, more bitter toward the new ideas than the King himself, 
they were the Ultra-royalists, or Ultras — men more royalist than the 
King, as they claimed. They saw in the Revolution only robbery and 
sacrilege and gross injustice to themselves. They bitterly as- 

The Ultras . , ^, i 

sailed Louis XVIII for grantmg the Charter, a dangerous con- 
cession to the Revolution, and they secretly wished to abolish it, 
meanwhile desiring to nullify its liberal provisions as far as possible. 
Their leader was the Count of Artois, brother of Louis XVIII, who, 
the King being childless, stood next in line of succession. 

For some years Louis XVIII was able to hold this extreme party in 
check and to follow a moderate policy. He was supported in this by 
, ^ the large majority of Liberals, moderate like himself, who until 

The work of a j j 

reorganiza- 1820 controlled Parliament. Much useful work was thus ac- 
^"° complished. The enormous war indemnity which the Allies 

had imposed in 181 5 was paid off and this liberated the country 
from the anny of occupation also imposed by them. The military 
system of France was reorganized and provision was made for an 
army of about 240,000 men. Promotion was to be for service and 
merit alone, a principle that was violently opposed by the Ultras as 
it destroyed all chances of the nobility securing a monopoly of the 
best positions. The legislation enacted at this time concerning the 
press and the electoral system was also of a liberal character. 

The Ultras were indignant at the moderation of the King and 
Parliament and did their best to break it down. They were alert 
Activity of fo seize upon every incident that might discredit the party in 
the Ultras power. A number of radicals were elected to the Chamber 
of Deputies. The Ultras raged against them, painting a lurid 
future. The murder in 1820 of the Duke of Berry, who stood 
Death of ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ throne, gave them their chance. The King 

Louis xvra was so horrified by this crime, as were also many moderate 
(1824) members of Parliament, that he offered less and less resist- 

ance to the Ultras. The closing years of the reign were less 



REACTIONARY LEGISLATION 369 

liberal than the earlier ones. Louis XVTII died in 1824 and was 
succeeded by his brother, the Count of Artois, who assumed the 
title of Charles X. 

THE REIGN OF CHARLES X 

The characteristics of the new King were well known. He was the 
convinced leader of the reactionaries in France from 18 14 to 1830. 
He had been the constant and bitter opponent of his brother's charies x 
liberalism, and had finally seen that liberalism forced to yield (1824-1830) 
to the growing strength of the party which he led. He was not 
likely to abandon lifelong principles at the age of sixty-seven, and at 
the moment when he seemed about to be able to put them into force. 

The coronation of the King revealed the temper of the new reign. 
France was treated to a spectacle of medieval mummery that amused 
and at the same time disgusted a people that had never been known to 
lack an appreciation of the ridiculous. Charles was anointed on 
seven parts of his person with sacred oil, miraculously preserved, it 
was asserted, from the time of Clovis. 

The -legislation urged by the King and largely enacted showed the 
belated political and social ideas of this government. Nearly a 
billion francs were voted as an indemnity to the nobles for ^^^ ^ 
their lands which had been confiscated and sold by the state indemnified 
during the Revolution. Many Frenchmen thought that confiscated" 
France had more urgent needs than to vote money to those during the 
who had deserted the country and had then fought against 
her. But the King had been leader of the emigres and was in entire 
sympathy with their point of view. 

Another law that cast discredit upon this reign, and helped under- 
mine it with the great mass of Frenchmen, was the law against sacri- 
lege. By this act burglaries committed in ecclesiastical build- ,^^^ j^^ 
ings and the profanation of holy vessels were, under certain against 
conditions, made punishable with death. This barbaric law ^*" ®^* 
was, as a matter of fact, never enforced, but it bore striking witness to 
the temper of the party in power, and has ever since been a mark of 
shame upon the Bourbon monarchy. It helped to weaken the hold of 
the Bourbons upon France. It created a feeling of intense bitterness 
among the middle and lower classes of society, which were still 
largely dominated by the rationalism of the eighteenth century. 
These classes began to fear the clerical reaction more even than the 



370 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 




y a 



THE REIGN OF CHARLES X 371 

political and social. Their apprehension was not decreased when 
a little later they saw the King himself, clad in the violet robe of a 
prelate and accompanied by the court, walking in a religious proces- 
sion and carrying a lighted candle through the streets of Paris. 
Was it the purpose of the aristocratic and clerical party to restore 
both the nobility and the church to the proud position they had 
occupied before the Revolution ? 

That it was was proclaimed by Polignac (p6-len-yak'), the most 
reactionary minister of this reign, who declared, on his accession to 
office in 1829, that his object was "to reorganize society, to 
restore to the clergy its former preponderance in the state, to Polignac 
create a powerful aristocracy and to surround it with privi- ™*^^*'y 
leges." 

The appointment of this ministry, indeed, aroused a remarkable 
exhibition of hostile feeling, vastly intensified by this declaration 
which was a direct challenge to Liberals of every shade, since it 
stated, as clearly as language could, that all the characteristic work of 
the French Revolution must be undone, that the pre-Revolutionary 
state and society should be restored, that the constitutional, political, 
social, and economic reorganization, the large installment of freedom, 
achieved during that momentous and fruitful period, should be swept 
aside, and that older ideas and ideals were to be enthroned once more. 

The appointment of the Polignac ministry and its audacious and 
alarming announcement precipitated a crisis, which shortly exploded 
in a revolution. The Chamber of Deputies practically de- co^flj^t 
manded the dismissal of the unpopular ministry. The King between 
replied by declaring that "his decisions' were unchangeable" and "the ^ 
and by dissolving the Chamber, hoping by means of new chamber oi 
elections to secure one subservient to his will. But the voters 
thought otherwise. The elections resulted in a crushing defeat 
for the King and his ministry. Charles would not yield. His own 
brother, Louis XVL had come to a tragic end, he said, because he 
had made concessions. Charles thought that he himself had learned 
something from history. In fact, he had learned the wrong lesson. 

Other methods of gaining his ends having failed, he now deter- 
mined upon coercion. On July 26, 1830, he issued several ordinances, 
suspending the liberty of the press, dissolving the Chamber of ordinances 
Deputies, changing the electoral system, reducing the number »* J"iy 
of voters from 100,000 to 25,000, and ordering new elections. In 



372 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

other words, the King was the supreme lawgiver, not at all hampered 
by the Charter. If these ordinances were to stand the people 
would enjoy their liberties simply at the humor of the monarch. 
Not to have opposed them would have been to acquiesce quietly in 
the transformation of the government into the absolute monarchy of 
Louis XIV. 

THE JULY REVOLUTION 

But the people of Paris did not acquiesce. As the significance of 
the ordinances became apparent, popular anger began to manifest 
itselL Crowds assembled in the streets shouting, "Down with 
the Ministry"; "Long live the Charter." On Wednesday, July 
28, 1830, civil war broke out. The insurgents were mainly old 
soldiers. Carbonari, and a group of republicans and workmen — 
men who hated the Bourbons, who followed the tricolor flag as the 
true national emblem, rather than the white flag of the royal house. 
This war lasted three days. It was the July Revolution — the 
Glorious Three Days. It was a street war and was limited to Paris. 
The insurgents were not very numerous, probably not more than 
ten thousand. But the government had itself probably not more 
than fourteen thousand troops in Paris. The insurrection was 
not difflcult to organize. The streets of Paris were narrow and 
crooked. Through such tortuous lanes it was impossible for the 
government to send artillery, a weapon which it alone pos- 
The char- scsscd. The Streets were paved with large stones. These 

acter of the '^ ° 

fighting could be torn up and piled in such a way as to make fortresses 

for the insurgents. In the night of July 27-28 the streets were 
cut up by hundreds of barricades made in this manner of paving 
stones, of overturned wagons, of barrels and boxes, of furniture, 
of trees and objects, of every description. Against such obstacles 
the soldiers could make but little progress. If they overthrew a 
barricade and passed on, it would immediately be built up again 
behind them more threatening than before because cutting their 
line of reenforcements and of possible retreat. Moreover, the 
soldiers had only the flint-lock gun, a weapon no better than that in 
the hands of the insurgents. Again, the officers had no knowledge 
of street fighting, whereas the insurgents had an intimate knowledge 
of the city, of its streets, and lanes. Moreover, the soldiers were 
reluctant to fight against the people. The fighting continued amid 



THE JULY REVOLUTION (1830) 



373 




374 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

the fierce heat of July. On July 31 Charles, seeing that all was lost, 
abdicated in favor of his nine-year-old grandson, the Duke of Bor- 
Abdication of deaux, son of the murdered Duke of Berry, and fled to England 
Charles X ^^^ his family. For two years he lived in Great Britain, 
keeping a melancholy court in Holyrood Palace, Edinburgh, of 
somber memory in the life of Mary, Queen of Scots. Removing later 
to Austria, he died in 1 836. 

What was the future government to be, now that triumphant revo- 
lution had for the second time swept a Bourbon monarch from his 
The House throne ? No serious consideration was given to the claims 
of Bourbon Qf ^^g little Duke of Bordeaux, unimpeachable from the point 
House of of view of monarchical theory and practice. He was the legit- 
Orieans? imate sovereign of France but he was quietly ignored by a 
people who were tired of the legitimate monarchy. Those who had 
done the actual fighting undoubtedly wanted a republic. But the 
journalists and deputies and the majority of the Parisians were 
opposed to such a solution, having vivid and unpleasant memories 
of the former republic, and believing that the proclamation of the 
republic would embroil France with monarchical Europe. They 
favored Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, who represented a younger 
branch of the royal family, a man who had always sympathized with 
liberal opinions. With such a man as king, it was said, there would 
be no more attempts to reenthrone the nobility and the clergy, but 
the government would be liberal, resting on the middle classes, and 
the Charter would be scrupujously observed. 

LOUIS PHILIPPE KING 

The final decision between monarchy and republic lay in the hands 
of Lafayette, the real leader of the Republicans. He finally threw 
his influence in favor of Louis Philippe, arguing that a monarchy 
under so liberal and democratic a prince would after all be " the best 
of republics." On August 7 the Chamber of Deputies called Louis 
Philippe to the throne, ignoring the claims of the legitimate ruler. 

Such was the July Revolution, an unexpected, impromptu affair. 
Not dreamed of July 25, it was over a week later. One king had been 
overthrown, another created, and the Charter had been slightly mod- 
ified. Parliamentary government had been preserved ; a return to 
aristocracy prevented. 



REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE 375 

Thus ends the Restoration, and the reign of Louis Phihppe now 
begins. Those who brought about the final overthrow of the elder 
Bourbons received no adequate reward. They had the tricolor ^j^^ ^^^ 
flag once more, but the rich bourgeoisie had the government, of the 
The Republicans yielded, but without renouncing their prin- ^^^*°''^'*°° 
ciples or their hopes. Cavaignac (ka-van-yak'), one of their 
leaders, when thanked for the abnegation of his party, replied, 
"You are wrong in thanking us; we have yielded because we are 
not yet strong enough. Later it will be different." The Revolu- 
tion, in fact, gave great impetus to the doctrine of the sovereignty 
of the people. 



INFLUENCE OF THE JULY REVOLUTION UPON EUROPE 

The influence of the Revolution of 1830 was felt all over Europe — 
in Poland, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, England, and the Nether- 
lands. It was the signal and encouragement for widespread popu- 
lar movements which for a short time seemed to threaten the whole 
structure erected in 1815 at Vienna. It created an immediate 
problem for the rulers of Europe. They had bound themselves in 
1 8 15 to guard against the outbreak of "revolution," to watch over 
and assure the " general tranquillity" of Europe. They had adopted 
and applied since then, as we have seen, the doctrine of intervention in 
the affairs of countries infected by revolutionary fever, as the great 
preservative of public order. Would, this self-constituted inter- 
national police acquiesce in the overthrow jof the legitimate king of 
France by the mob of Paris ? Now that revolution had again broken 
out in that restless country, would they "intervene" as they had 
done in Spain and Italy? At first they were disposed to do so. 
Metternich's immediate impulse was to organize a coalition against 
Louis Philippe, " King of the Barricades." But when the time came 
this was seen to be impracticable, for Russia was occupied _ 

PowGrlsss- 

with a revolution in Poland, Austria with revolutions in ness of the 
Italy, Prussia with similar movements in Germany, and Eng- ^'^j^^.^ 
land was engrossed in the most absorbing discussion of domestic 
problems she had faced in many decades. Moreover, England 
approved the revolution. All the powers, therefore, recognized 
Louis Philippe, though with varying indications of annoyance. In 
one particular, consequently, the settlement of 18 15 was undone 



376 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

forever. The elder branch of the House of Bourbon, put upon the 
throne of France by the AlUes of 1815, was now pushed from it, and 
the revolution, hated of the other powers, had done it. 



REVOLUTION IN THE NETHERLANDS 

Another part of the diplomatic structure of 18 15 was now over- 
thrown. The Congress of Vienna had created an essentially artificial 
state to the north of France, the Kingdom of the Netherlands. 
Khigdom It had done this explicitly for the purpose of having a barrier 

of the against France. The Belgian provinces, hitherto Austrian, 

were in 181 5 annexed to Holland, to strengthen that state in 
order that it might be in a position to resist attack until the other 
powers should come to its rescue. 

But it was easier to declare these two peoples formally united under 

one ruler than to make them in any real sense a single nation. Though 

it might seem by a glance at the map that the peoples of this 

A union of ° jo x- r- r- 

two dissimi- little comer of Europe must be essentially homogeneous, such 
lar peoples ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^l the case. There were many more points of 
difference than of similarity between them. They spoke different 
languages. They belonged to different religions, the Dutch being 
Protestant, the Belgians Catholic. They differed in their economic 
life and principles. The Dutch were an agricultural and commercial 
people and inclined toward free trade, the Belgians were a manu- 
facturing people and inclined toward protection. 

For the Belgians the union with the Dutch was an unhappy one 
from the start. They saw themselves added to and subjected to 
another people inferior in numbers to themselves, whereas the feeling 
of nationality had been aroused in them as in other peoples by the 
spirit and example of the French Revolution and they had hoped for 
a larger and more independent life than they had ever had before. 

A union so inharmoniously begun was never satisfactory to the Bel- 
gians. Friction was constant. The Belgians resented the fact that 
the officials in the state and army were nearly all Dutch. They 
between the objected to the King's attempts to force the Dutch language 
Belgians and j^to a position of undue privilege. The evident desire of the 

the Dutch ^. ^ . . . ' * 

King t6 fuse his two peoples into one was a constant irritation. 
The system was more and more disliked by the Belgians as the years 
went by. 



^^ 



THE BELGIANS DECLARE THEIR INDEPENDENCE 377 



The Jul}" Revolution came as a spark in the midst of all this inflam- 
mable material. There was street fighting in Brussels as ^. „ . . 

" ° The Belgians 

there had been in Pans. The revolution spread rapidly. The declare their 
royal troops were driven out and on October 4, 1830, Belgium ii^^ependence 
declared itself independent. A congress was called to determine the 
future form of government. It decided in favor of a monarchy, 

adopted a liberal constitution, 

and elected as king Leopold 
of Coburg, who, in Juh', 1831, 
was crowned. 

Would the Great Powers 
which in 181 5 had added 
Belgium to Holland consent 
to the undoing of their work ? 
Would they recognize the new 
kingdom? They had sup- 
pressed revolution in Spain 
and Italy, as we have seen. 
Would they do it again in the 
interest of their handiwork, 
the treaties of Vienna ? Now, 
however, they were divided, 
and in this division lay the 
salvation of the new state. 
The Czar wished to intervene 
and Prussia seemed similarly 
inclined, but Louis Philippe, 
knowing that his own throne 
would be overthrown by the 
Parisians if he allowed these 

absolute monarchies to crush the new liberties of the Belgians, gave 
explicit warning that if they intervened France also would intervene 
"in order to hold the balance even." 

The Powers therefore made the best of the situation. At 
a conference in London, Russia, Prussia, Austria, France, and oA'he K*i^K- 
England recognized the independence of Belgium ; they went 
farther and formally promised to respect its neutrality forever. 

This part of the work of the Congress of Vienna had consequently 
been undone. A new state had arisen in Europe, as a result of 
revolution. 




Leopold 



Engraved by Levy, after the painting liy 
Winterhalter. 



dom of 
Belgium 



378 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

The success of the Belgian revolution had to a considerable extent 
been rendered possible by a revolution in Poland, which ended in dis- 
astrous failure. Neither Russia, nor Prussia, nor Austria would have 
acquiesced so easily in the dismemberment of the Kingdom of the 
Netherlands had they not feared that if they went to war with France 
concerning it, France (Would in turn aid the Poles, and the future of 
the Poles was of far greater immediate importance to them than the 
future of the Netherlands. The French Revolution of 1830 was 
followed by the rise of the Kingdom of Belgium ; but it was also 
followed by the disappearance of the Kingdom of Poland. 

REVOLUTION IN POLAND 

In the Middle Ages Poland had been a more powerful state than 
Russia and included territory which stretched from the Baltic to the 
Black Sea and from the Oder to the Dnieper. It had remained an 
independent state down to the last quarter of the eighteenth century. 
During that quarter its independence had been destroyed, as we have 
The destnic- ^een, and its territory seized by its three neighbors, Russia, 
tion of Prussia, and Austria, in the famous, or rather infamous, parti- 

tions of 1772, 1793, and 1795. Nothing was left of Poland on 
the map. The Poles made a brave and desperate resistance but 
" freedom shrieked when Kosciusko fell." 

The effects of this assassination of an independent state by the 

three absolute monarchies of eastern Europe were destined to be 

. momentous and far-reaching. The Polish question has been 

Polish a factor in all the subsequent history of Europe. The Poles, 

question naturally, like any freedom-loving people, refused to acquiesce 

in a fate so unmerited, so cruel. But they could only wait and 

hope. 

"No wise or honest man," wrote Edmund Burke at the time, "can 
approve of that partition, or can contemplate it without prog- 
nosticating great mischief from it to all countries at some future 
date." The particular effect of this odious act of the royal and titled 
The destruc- highwaymen was the extraordinary intensification it gave to 
tion of Poland what was to prove one of the most vital and troublesome 
spirit of na- tendencies of modern history, the principle of nationality, 
tionaiity ^he Polish people's passionate love of country was given an 

imperishable ideal, a pillar of cloud by day, a pillar of fire by night, 



POLAND AND THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA 379 



riveting the attention of the nation so wantonly destroyed, inspiring 
a grim determination to recover what had been lost. 

The Poles had hoped that the French Revolution, and, later, that 
Napoleon might restore their nationality. In this they were disap- 
pointed. But in 1815 at the Congress of Vienna they found The 
unexpected aid, though it proved in the end illusory. Alex- restoraUon 
ander I, Czar of Russia, was at that time aglow with generous dom of Po- 
and romantic sentiments and was for a few years a patron of '^"'^ '° '^'^ 
liberal ideas in various countries. Under the influence of these ideas 

he conceived the plan of restor- 

ing the old Kingdom of Poland. 
Poland should be a kingdom en- 
tirely separate from the Empire of 
Russia. He would be Emperor 
of Russia and King of Poland. 
The union of two states would be 
simply personal. 

Alexander had desired to restore 
Poland to the full extent of its pos- 
sessions in the eighteenth century. 
To render this possible Prussia and 
Austria must relinquish the prov- 
inces they had acquired in the 
three partitions. This, however, 
was not accomplished at the Con- 
gress of Vienna. Although Prussia 
and Austria did give back some 
of their Polish possessions, they 

retained some. The tragedy of Poland was that the Poles, in spirit 
a single people, were subjects of three nations and as such might be 
forced to fight each other, in that most dreadful of conflicts, that of 
brother against brother. 

The new Polish Kingdom, erected in 181 5, was simply a part, there- 
fore, of historic Poland, nor did it even include all of the Polish terri- 
tories that Russia had acquired. Of this new state Alexander 

, . . , , . , . Alexander I 

was to be king. To it he granted a constitution, establishing grants a 
a parliament of two chambers, with considerable powers. t°"p*'j*JJj'^°° 
Roman Catholicism was recognized as the state religion ; but 
a generous measure of toleration was given to other sects. Liberty 




Alexander I 
From an engraving by Allais. 



38o REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

of the press was guaranteed, subject to laws designed to prevent its 
abuse. The Polish language was made the oflficial language. All 
positions in the government were to be filled by Poles, not by Rus- 
sians. No people in central Europe possessed such liberal institu- 
tions as those with which the Poles were now invested. A prosperous 
career as a constitutional monarchy seemed about to begin. The 
Poles had never enjoyed so much civil freedom, and they were now 
receiving a considerable measure of home-rule. But this regime, 
well-meant and full of promise, encountered obstacles from the start. 
Friction The Russians were opposed to the idea of a restored Poland, and 

Poies^and^he particularly to a constitutional Poland, when they themselves 
Russians had no constitution. Why should their old enemy be so 

greatly favored when they, the real supporters of the Czar, were not? 
The hatred of Russians and Poles, a fact centuries old, continued 
undiminished. Moreover, what the dominant class of Poles desired, 
far more than liberal government, was independence. They could 
never forget the days of their prosperity. Independence 
The Poles Alexander would never grant. His purposes and the aspira- 

divided into . . , „ , - •, , , fr r r - 

two classes tions of the Poles were irreconcilable. After a few years fric- 
tion developed between the ruler and the ruled. The latter 
became more and more convinced that they must fight for their 
liberty, waiting only for a favorable moment. 

That moment seemed to have come in 1830. The Poles were 
inflamed by the reports of the successful revolution in France ; 
by the belief that the French would aid them if they strove to imitate 
their example. When, therefore, the Czar summoned the Polish 
army to prepare for a campaign whose object was the suppression of 
the Belgian revolution, the determination of the Poles was quickly 
made. They rose in insurrection toward the end of 1830, declared 
that the House of Romanoff had ceased to rule in Poland, and pre- 
pared for a life and death struggle. 

Russia's military resources, however, were so great that Poland 

The Polish could not hope alone to achieve her national independence. The 

expectation Poles expected foreign intervention, but no intervention came. 

aid d^s'a^p° Enthusiasm for the Poles was widespread among the people in 

pointed France, in England, and in Germany. But the governments, 

none of which was controlled by public opinion, refused to move. 

Thus Poland was left to fight alone with Russia and of the outcome 

there could be no doubt. The Poles fought with great bravery, but 



DESTRUCTION OF THE POLISH KINGDOM 381 

without good leadership, without careful organization, without a 
spirit of subordination to military authorities. The war went on 
from January, 1 83 1 , until September of that year, when Warsaw 
fell before the Russians. The results of this ill-advised and ill- of the insur- 
executed insurrection were deplorable in the extreme. Poland ^^'^^^°°^ 
ceased to exist as a separate kingdom and became merely a province 
of the Russian Empire. Its constitution was abolished and it was 
henceforth ruled with great severity and arbitrariness. The insur- 
gents were savagely punished. Many were executed, many sent to 
Siberia. Thousands of Polish officers and soldiers escaped to the 
countries of western Europe and became a revolutionary element in 
Paris, Berlin, and Vienna, always ready to fight for liberty. They 
were the sworn foes of tyranny everywhere as they were its most 
conspicuous victims. Even the Polish language seemed doomed, so 
repressive was the policj^ now followed by Russia. The Poles' sole 
satisfaction was a highly altruistic one, that by their revolt they had 
contributed greatly to the success of the revolutions in France and 
Belgium. They had prevented the Holy Alliance from intervening 
to suppress the revolutions of 1830, as it had suppressed those of 1820. 

REVOLUTION IN ITALY 

Another country which felt the revolutionary wave of 1830 was 

Itah'. Revolutions broke out in the duchies of Modena and Parma, 

whose rulers were forced to flee, and in parts of the Papal Revolutions 

States. Hatred of Austria and dissatisfaction with local '° ^'^'y 

. easily sup- 

arbitrary and despotic governments were the causes. The pressed in 

revolutionists expected the hostility of Austria but they hoped '*^' 
for the support of France as well as of the people of other Italian 
states. But none was forthcoming, Louis Philippe feeling too inse- 
cure himself at home. The result was that Austrian troops appeared 
upon the scene and easily restored the exiled rulers. The Pope 
recovered his provinces. The episode was over. Reaction again held 
sway in Italy. 

REVOLUTION IN GERMANY 

Thus in 1830 revolution raged with varying vehemence all about 
Germany — in France, in Belgium, in Poland, and in Italy. Revolution 
The movement also affected Germany itself. In Brunswick. "* Germany 
Saxonv, Hesse-Cassel, and in two Sa.xon duchies revolutionary 



382 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

movements broke out with the result that several new constitutions 
were added to those already granted. The new ones were chiefly in 
North German, whereas the earlier ones had been mainly in South 
German states. But the two great states, Austria and Prussia, passed 
unscathed and set themselves to bring about a reaction, as soon as the 
more pressing dangers in Poland and Italy and France were over, and 
they themselves felt secure. Using certain popular demonstrations, 
essentially insignificant, with all the effect with which he had previ- 
ously used the Wartburg Festival, Metternich succeeded in carrying 
reaction farther than he had been able to even in the Carlsbad Decrees 
of 1 8 19. Those decrees had been aimed chiefly at the universities and 
the press. New regulations were adopted, in 1832 and 1834, by which 
Metternich secured not only the renewal of these but the enactment of 
additional repressive measures, restricting the rights of such parlia- 
ments as existed in various states and still further muzzling the uni- 
versities and the press. Constitutional life in the few states where 
it existed was reduced to a minimum. The political history of Ger- 
many offers but little interest until the great mid-century uprising of 
1848 shook this entire system of negation and repression to the ground. 
Only in France and in Belgium had the commotions of 1830 
achieved success. France had a new king. Belgium had won her 
independence. 

THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE 

Louis Philippe (16-e-fi-lep'), the new monarch of the French, was 

already in his fifty-seventh year. He was the son of the notorious 

Philippe Egalite, who had intrigued during the Revolution for 

of Loi^s^ the throne occupied by his cousin, Louis XVI, who had, as a 

PhUippe member of the Convention, voted for the latter's execution, and 

whohadhimself later perished miserably on the scaffold. In 1789 

Louis Philippe was only sixteen years of age, too young to take part 

in politics, although he became a member of the Jacobin Club. Later 

he joined the army and fought valiantly for the Republic at Valmy 

and Jemappes. Becoming suspected of treason he fled from France 

in 1793 and entered upon a life of exile that was to last twenty-one 

years. He went to Switzerland, where he lived for a while, teaching 

geography and mathematics in a school in Reichenau. Leaving 

Switzerland when his incognito was discovered he traveled as far 

north as the North Cape, and as far west as the United States. 



THE PERSONALITY OF LOUIS PHILIPPE 



383 



He finally settled in England and lived on a pension granted by 
the British government. Returning to France on the fall of 
Napoleon he was able to recover a large part of the family prop- 
erty, which, though confiscated during the Revolution, had not 
been actually sold. During the Restoration he lived in the famous 
Palais Royal in the very heart of Paris, cultivating relations that 

might some day prove 
useful, particu- 
larly appealing to Hberalism 

the solid, rich 
bourgeoisie by a display 
of liberal sentiments and 
by a good-humored, un- 
conventional mode of 
life. He walked the 
streets of Paris alone, 
talked and even drank 
with workmen with en- 
gaging informality, and 
sent his sons to the pub- 
lic schools to associate 
with the sons of the 
bourgeoisie — a delicate 
compliment fully ap- 
preciated by the latter. 
But beneath this ex- 
terior of republican sim- 
plicity there lay a strong 
ambition for personal 
power, a nature essen- 
tially autocratic. 
His legal title to his position was very weak. He had been invited to 

ascend the throne by only 219 members of the Chamber of Deputies out 

of 430, a bare majority. 

been authorized to choose a king 

was troubled. 

endure. As the people were never asked whether they wished Louis 

Philippe as their king, his rule always lacked any popular sanction, 

such as Napoleon's had always possessed. It had many enemies who 




Louis Philippe 

Engraving, bj' Pannier, after the painting by 
Winterhalter. 



Moreover, the Chamber had never „. , , 

' His legal 

The first part of the reign title to the 
It was very doubtful whether it could long * ^°^^ 



384 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

denied its right to exist, Legitimists, Bonapartists, and Republicans. 
The Legitimists defended the rights of Charles X and his descend- 
Q . . ants. They regarded Louis Philippe as a usurper, a thief who 

of the Legit- had treacherously and shamelessly stolen the crowu of the 
"°*^'^ young Duke of Bordeaux. This party was numerically small, 

so thoroughly had the reign of Charles X offended and alienated the 
nation. It gave Louis Philippe little trouble save through the biting 
sarcasms with which aristocratic society regaled itself at the expense 
of his honor and chivalry ; also at the expense of his personal appear- 
ance. It attempted only one insurrection, which was easily put 
down. 

OPPOSITION OF THE REPUBLICANS 

But Louis Philippe's struggle with the Republicans was far more 
severe. The latter had acquiesced in his rule at first on the assurance 
of Lafayette, in whom they reposed great confidence, that that 
rule would really constitute the best of republics, that the King was 
essentially democratic, that the popular throne would be surrounded 
by republican institutions. But both they and Lafayette were 
shortly undeceived. They had expected that the new government 
would adopt a broad, liberal, national policy, would consider the 
interests of all sections of the population, and would favor a demo- 
cratic evolution of the country. Instead, they saw rapidly set up a 
narrow class system, which opposed democracy as it opposed aris- 
tocracy. The July Monarchy early asserted that its policy would be 
that of the "golden mean," neither conservative nor radical, 
of the but moderate. At the beginning the suffrage was broadened, 

" golden \yy ^ reduction of age and property qualifications, so that the 

electorate was doubled and there were now about 200,000 
voters, where there had formerly been 100,000. This might have 
been tolerable as a mere beginning in the right direction. But 
the government soon made it manifest that it was not only the begin- 
ning but the end, that there would be no further enlargement of the 
electorate. As a matter of fact this meant that it was the upper bour- 
geoisie who were henceforth to rule France, the wealthy or well-to-do 
The reign of bankers, manufacturers, merchants. The great mass of the 
the wealthy people were to have no power. The argument was put forth 
that the propertied and educated were the only people fit to rule, 
that legislation considered wise for them was for the best of all as its 



CHARACTER OF THE JULY MONARCHY 385 

benefits were diffused naturally through all classes. It was virtually 
the argument of the employer that what is good for him is good for 
the employee. 

The July Monarchy was liberal, in one way. It was an assurance 
that there should be no return toward the Old Regime, no attempt to 
restore, more or less, directly or indirectly, the aristocracy ,, 

■' . .' ' -'No return 

and the clergy to their former position. That much was to the oid 
definitely settled, once for all. On the other hand, it would ^sme 
have nothing to do with democracy, even as a remote ideal. Democ- 
racy meant anarchy, disorder, violence, as the Revolution had „ 

^ -^ No progress 

shown. What was wanted was moderation, the golden toward 
mean. The July Monarchy was the reign of the upper middle ^^^o^^racy 
class, considered now, by itself, the only safe depository of power. 
No reversion to outworn, aristocratic ideals, no gradual progression 
toward democracy, but the steady maintenance, without further 
change, of the system established by the Charter as revised in 1830, 
such was the policy of the July Monarchy from which it never 
deviated. 

The Republicans did not share this opinion that all wisdom was 
limited to the bourgeoisie. The)'" wished to press forward from present 
liberties to larger liberties, to educate the people more and more in 
self-government, to legislate with a view to the interests of all the 
classes and conditions of men that are contained in a great nation. 
To them it seemed that the July Monarchy was making a grotesque 
simplification of what was in reality a very tangled and complex 
problem in identifj'ing the welfare of France with simply the welfare 
of a prosperous and educated class. The Republicans there- Republican 
fore became the enemies of the July Monarchy. They at- insurrections 
tempted insurrections which were serious, but which were put down. 
The Government adopted vigorous measures for their suppression, 
breaking up their societies, restricting the right of association, pros- 
ecuting their editors, crushing their newspapers under heavy fines, 
finally forbidding by law any argument for, or defense of, any other 
form of government than that of the existing monarchy, and forbid- 
ding any one to declare himself an adherent of any fallen royal house. 

These laws greatly weakened the moral position of the July ^j^^ 
Monarchy, as they made individual liberty only an empty September 
word. But they were successful in their immediate aim. ^^^' ^ ^^ 
They drove all rival parties, the Republicans included, to cover, and 



386 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 



France was governed for eighteen years by the propertied classes, by 
an aristocracy of wealth. The Republicans, duped, seeing that the 
July Monarchy promised no growth in liberty, were the bitter enemies 
of the regime, but were effectually silenced for many long years. 
Their enmity, however, was a factor in the ultimate overthrow of this 
system. , 

THE GUIZOT MINISTRY 

The parliamentary history of France during the ten years from 1830 
to 1840 was marked by instability. There were ten ministries within 

ten years. But from 1 840 
to 1848 there was only 
one, that of Guizot (ge- 
zo')- For several ^^ears 
after his accession to the 
throne Louis Philippe was 
careful to guard himself 
from all appearance of 
assuming personal power. 
But now that his enemies 
were overthrown and 
crushed he began to re- 
veal his real purpose of 
being monarch in fact as 
well as in name. He had 
no intention of following 
the English theor}^ that, 
in constitutional as dis- 
tinguished from absolute 
monarchies, the king 
reigns but does not gov- 
ern. He now found in 
Guizot a man who sj'm- 
pathized with his views 
of kingship, and who did 
not believe that the mon- 
arch should be simply an 
ornamental head of the state. Louis Philippe had in his chief 
minister a man after his own heart. Guizot, eminent as a professor, 




Guizot 

After a lithograph by Lassalle, from the portrait by 
Delaroche. 



THE GUIZOT MINISTRY 387 

an historian, and an orator, held certain pohtical principles with the 
tenacity of a mathematician. He refused to recognize that France 
needed any alteration in her political institutions. He be- ^ . 
lieved in the Charter of 18 14, as revised in 1830. Any political 
further reform would be unnecessary and dangerous. Guizot's p"°"p ®® 
policy was one of stiff, unyielding conservatism. He opposed any 
extension of the suffrage, he opposed any legislation for the laboring 
classes, he opposed this, he opposed that. All discontent appeared 
to him frivolous, fictitious, merely the devious work of designing 
men bent on feathering their own nests. 

Year after year this negative polic}', this policy of mere inertia, was 
pursued, arousing more and more disgust. ' ' What have they done for 
the past seven years ? " exclaimed a deputy in 1847. " Nothing, ^^ j 

nothing, nothing." "France is becoming bored," said Lamar- icy of rigid 
tine. Yet this stagnant government was living in a world fer- *^'*®®'^* '^"^ 
menting with ideas, apparently oblivious of the fact. The July Mon- 
archy was a government of the bourgeoisie, of the well-to-do, of the 
capitalists. They alone possessed the suffrage. Consequently, the 
remainder of the population was, in a political sense, of no impor- 
tance. The legislation enacted during these eighteen years was 
class legislation, which favored the bourgeoisie and which made no 
attempt to meet the needs of the masses. Yet the distress of the 
masses was widespread and deep and should have received the careful 
and sympathetic attention of the government. 



GROWTH OF SOCIALISM 

Their situation provoked discussion and many writers began to 
preach new doctrines concerning the organization of industry and the 
crucial question of the relations of capital and labor, doctrines g^j^^, 
henceforth called socialistic, and appealing with increasing force Simon's 
to the millions of laborers who believed that society weighed p''°^'^*™ 
with unjustifiable severity upon them, that their labor did not by 
any means receive its proportionate reward. Saint-Simon was the 
first to announce a socialistic scheme for the reorganization of society 
in the interest of the most numerous class. He believed that the 
state should own the means of production and should organize indus- 
try on the principle of "Labor according to capacity and reward 
according to services." Saint-Simon was a speculative thinker, not a 



388 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

practical man of affairs. His doctrine gained in direct importance 
when it was adopted by a man who was a pohtician, able to recruit 
and lead a party, and to make a program definite enough to appeal 
Louis Blanc to the masses. Such a man was Louis Blanc, who was destined 
(i8i 1-1882) j-Q play a great part in the overthrow of the July Monarchy and 
in the Republic that succeeded. In his writings he tried to convince 
the laborers of France of the evils of the prevailing economic conditions, 
a task which was not difficult. He denounced in vehement terms the 
government of the bourgeoisie as government of the rich, by the rich, 
and for the rich. It must be swept away and the state must be 
organized on a thoroughly democratic basis. Louis Blanc proclaimed 
the right of every man to employment and the duty of the state to 
provide it. This it could do if it would organize industry. Let the 
state establish, with its own capital, national workshops. Let the 
workmen manage these and share the profits. The class of employers 
would thus disappear and the laborers would get the full result of 
their labor. Louis Blanc's theories, propounded in a style at once 
clear and vivid, were largely adopted by workingmen. A socialist 
party was thus created. It believed in a republic ; but it differed 
from the other republicans in that, while they desired simply a change 
in the form of government, it desired a far more sweeping change in 
society. 

The amount of discontent with the government of France was great 
and growing. Yet it could accomplish nothing because the ministry 
was steadily supported by the Chamber of Deputies and that Cham- 
ber was elected by the two hundred thousand voters. On examina- 
tion it was seen that Guizot obtained his never-failing majority 
ministry and by corrupt methods. The electoral assemblies which chose 
parUamentary ^-^g deputies were SO Small, frequently consisting of not more 

corruption '■ ^ -t. j o 

than two hundred members, many of them office-holders, that 
they could be bribed, in one way or another, to elect deputies pleas- 
ing to the ministry. Then within the Chamber the same methods 
would be used. About two hundred of the four hundred and thirty 
deputies were at the same time office-holders. The ministry con- 
trolled them, as all promotions or increases of salary were dependent 
upon its favor. It needed to gain only a few more votes to have a 
majority and this was easy, as it had so many favors to distribute. 



WIDESPREAD DEMAND FOR REFORM 389 

DEM-\XD FOR ELECTOR-\L .\XD PARXL^MEXTARY REF0R:M 

A reform party thus gradually grew up which did not at all wish 
to overthrow the monarchy but which did demand a change in the 
composition of the Chamber of Deputies and in the manner of 
electing it, parliamentar}- reform and electoral reform. Deputies 
should be forbidden to be at the same time office-holders, and the 
number of voters should be so increased that it would be impossible 
to corrupt them. Against both these propositions, renewed year 
after year, during his entire ministry-, Guizot resolutely set his face. 
He asserted that the reform movement was only the work of a few, 
that the people as a whole were entirely indifferent to it. To prove 
the falsity of this assertion the Opposition instituted, in 1847, a 
series of "reform banquets" which were attended by the The reform 
people and addressed by the reformers. These banquets banquets " 
were instituted by those loyal to the monarchy, but hostile to its 
policy. Similar meetings, however, were instituted by the Republi- 
cans, who were opposed to the very existence of the monarchy. 

Great enthusiasm was aroused by these meetings all over the 
countn,'. It was conclusively shown that the people were behind this 
demand for reform. But the ministr}- refused to budge and the King 
denounced the agitation as pernicious. He even denied the legal 
right of the people to hold such meetings. To test this right before 
the courts of law the Opposition arranged a great banquet for Feb- 
ruary' 22, 1848, in Paris. Eighty-seven prominent deputies promised 
to attend. All were to meet in front of the church of the Madeleine 
(mad-Ian') and march to the banquet hall. In the night of February 
21-22 the Government posted orders forbidding this procession and 
all similar meetings. Rather than force the issue the deputies 
who had agreed to attend yielded, though under protest. But a 
vast crowd congregated, of students, workingmen, and others. They 
had no leader, no definite purpose. The crowd committed slight acts 
of lawlessness, but nothing serious happened that da}'. But in the 
night barricades arose in the workingmen's quarters of the city. 
Some shots were fired. The Government called out the National 
Guard. It refused to march against the insurgents. Some of its 
members even began to shout, "Long live Reform !" "Down with 
Guizot!" The King, frightened at this alarming development, 
was willing to grant 'eform. Guizot would not consent and con- 



390 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 

sequently withdrew from office. This news was greeted with en- 
thusiasm by the crowds and, in the evening of February 23, Paris was 
Resignation illuminated and the trouble seemed ended. The contest thus 
of Guizot f a^j- j^a(j been simply between Royalists, those who supported the 
Guizot ministry, and the reformers, and the fall of Guizot was the 
triumph of the latter. But the movement no longer remained thus 
circumscribed. The Republicans now entered aggressively upon the 
scene, resolved to arouse the excited people against Louis Philippe 
himself and against the monarchy. They marched through the 
boulevards and made a hostile demonstration before Guizot's resi- 
dence. Some unknown person fired a shot at the guards. The 
guards instantly replied, fifty persons fell, more than twenty dead. 
This was the doom of the monarchy. The Republicans seized the 
occasion to inflame the people further. Several of the corpses were 
put upon a cart which was lighted by a torch. The cart was then 
drawn through the streets. The ghastly spectacle aroused every- 
where the angriest passions ; cries of "Vengeance ! " followed it along 
its course. From the towers the tocsin sounded its wild and sinister 
appeal. 

THE OVERTHROW OF LOUIS PHILIPPE 

Thus began a riot which grew in vehemence hourly, and which 
swept all before it. The cries of "Long live Reform ! " heard the day 
before, now gave way to the more ominous cries of "Long live the 
Republic !" Finally, on February 24, the King abdicated in favor 
of his grandson, the little Count of Paris, and, under the incognito of 
"Mr. Smith" finally reached England. Guizot followed, as did 
Metternich somewhat later, for reasons of his own. The King's life 
of exile was ended two years later by his death at Claremont. 

He had abdicated in favor of his grandson, but the Republicans and 
Socialists who had forced the abdication would not consent to the 
continuance of the monarchy. They were able to procure 
the Second the creation of a Provisional Government, composed of the 
Republic leaders of both parties, with Lamartine at its head and Louis 

Blanc as one of the members. The Provisional Government im- 
mediately proclaimed the Republic, subject to ratification by the 
people. 



PROCLAMATION OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC 391 

REFERENCES 

The Constitutional Charter of 1814 : Anderson, Constitutions and 
Documents, No. 93, pp. 456-464. 

Reign of Louis XVIII : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 375-38°. 427- 
447, 469-475; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 23-36, 81-86; Seignobos, Political 
History of Europe Since 1S14, pp. 103-121. 

Reign OF Charles X : Fyffe, pp. 603-619 ; Seignobos, pp. 1 21-132; Cam- 
bridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 85-103. 

Rise of the Kingdom of Belgium : Ensor, Belgium (Home University 
Library), pp. 114-141 ; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 619-625; Phillips, 
Modern Europe, pp. 186-199; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XVI, 

PP- 517-544- 

Polish Insurrection: Phillips, Poland (Home University Library), Chap. 
VIII, pp. 101-125; Fyffe, pp. 625-630; Skrine, The Expansion of Russia, pp. 
110-122 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 445-474. 

Revolutions in Italy : Fyffe, pp. 631-635 ; Thayer, Dawn of Italian Inde- 
pe>tdcnce. Vol. I, pp. 342-378. 

Revolutionary Movements in Germany : Sybel, The Founding of tile 
German Empire, Vol. I, pp. 342-378; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 

374-376- 

The Government of Louis Philippe : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 
699-703; Lebon, Modern France, pp. 1 71-196; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 
176-185, 255-261 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 132- 
152 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XV; Vol. XI, Chap. II. 

Early French Socialism: Ely, French and German Socialism, pp. 66-71, 
108-123; Kirkup, History of Socialism, pp. 22-40. 

The February Revolution: Seignobos, pp. 155-159; Andrews, C. M., 
The Historical Development of Modern Europe, Vol. I, pp. 336-345 ; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 96-105. 



CHAPTER XVIII 

CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

THE GREAT MID-CENTURY UPRISING OF THE PEOPLES 

Central Europe at the opening of 1848 was in a restless, disturbed, 
expectant state. Everywhere men were wearied with the old order 
and demanding change. A revolutionary spirit was at work, the 
public mind in Germany, Italy, and Austria was excited. Into a 
society so perturbed and so active came the news of the fall of Louis 
Pliilippe. It was the spark that set the world in conflagration. The 
French Revolution of 1 848 was the signal for the most wide-reaching 
disturbance of the century. Revolutions broke out from the Baltic 
to the Mediterranean, from France to the Russian frontier. The 
whole system of reaction, which had succeeded Waterloo and which 
had come to be personified in the imperturbable Metternich, crashed 
in unutterable confusion. The great mid-centur}^ uprising of the 
peoples had begun', the most widespread convulsion Europe was 
Vienna the destined to know until 1914. The storm center of this con- 
storm center yulsion was Vienna, hitherto the proud bulwark of the estab- 
lished order. Here in the Austrian Empire one of the most confused 
chapters in European history began. It seemed for a time as if 
Austria was doomed to complete disruption, as if she was about to 
disappear as a great state. 

LOUIS KOSSUTH AND THE HUNGARIANS 

The immediate impulse came from Hungary where for several 
years a nationalistic movement had been in progress. With this 
tendency toward a sharper assertion of the national spirit had been 
coupled an increasingh^ aggressive reform movement. The insti- 
tutions of Hungary were thoroughly medieval. The nobility alone 
possessed political power, at the same time being entirely exempt 

39-^ 



LIBERAL MOVEMENT IN HUNGARY 



393 



from taxation. A liberal and democratic party, nourished on the 
ideas of western Europe, had grown up, led by Louis Kossuth, one of 
Hungary's greatest heroes, and Francis Deak (da'-ak), whose ^^^^.^ 
personality is less striking, but whose services to his coun- Kossuth 
try were to be more solid and enduring. Kossuth had first *' 02-1894) 
come into notice as the editor of a paper which described in vivid 
and liberal style the debates in the Hungarian Diet. When it was 
forbidden to print these 
reports he had them litho- 
graphed. When this was 
forbidden he had them 
written out by hand by a 
corps of amanuenses and 
distributed by servants. 
Finally he was arrested 
and sentenced to prison. 
During his imprisonment 
of three years Kossuth ap- 
plied himself to serious 
studies, particularly to 
that of the English lan- 
guage, with such success 
that he was able later to 
address large audiences in 
England and the United 
States with great effect. 
In 1840 he was released 
and obtained permission 
to edit a daily paper. 

Kossuth was the very incarnation of the great democratic ideas 
of the age. He wished to erase all distinctions between noble and 
non-noble, to fuse all into one common whole. He demanded 
democratic reforms in everj^ department of the national life ; aboli- 
tion of the privileges of the nobility and of their exemption from 
taxation ; equal rights and equal burdens for all citizens ; trial by 
jury; reform of the criminal code. Kossuth's irnpassioned appeals 
were made directly to the people. He sought to create, and did 
create, a powerful public opinion clamorous for change. This 
vigorous liberal opposition to the established order, an opposition 




Louis Kossuth 



394 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

ably led and full of fire, grew rapidly. In 1847 it published its 

program, drawn up by Deak. This demanded the taxation of 

the nobles, the control by the Diet of all national expendi- 

demands of tures, larger liberty for the press, and a complete right of 

the Hunga- public meeting and association ; it demanded also that Hungary 

rians in 1847 , , , , , i- a • i- 1 1 

should not be subordmate to Austrian policy, and to the 
Austrian provinces. Such was the situation when the great reform 
wave of 1848 began to sweep over Europe. 

The effect of the news of the fall of Louis Philippe was electrifying. 

The passion of the hour was expressed in a flaming speech by Kossuth, 

who proved himself a consummate spokesman for a people in 

decisive in- Tcvolt. Of imprcssivc presence, and endowed with a wonder- 

tervention of f^j voice, he was revolutionary oratory incarnate. In a 

Hungary 

speech in the Diet, March 3, 1848, he voiced the feelings of the 

time, bitterly denouncing the whole system of Austrian government. 

The effect of this speech was immediate and profound, not only in 

Hungary but in Austria proper. Translated into German, and 

published in Vienna, it inflamed the passions of the people. Ten 

days later a riot broke out in Vienna itself, organized largely by 

students and workingmen. The soldiers fired and bloodshed resulted. 

Barricades were erected and the people and soldiers fought hand to 

hand. The crowd surged about and into the imperial palace, and 

The over- invaded the hall in which the Diet was sitting, crying "Down 

throw of with Metternich !" Metternich, who for thirty-nine years 

ettermc ^^^ stood at the head of the Austrian states, who was the very 

source and fount of reaction, imperturbable, pitiless, masterful, was 

now forced to resign, to flee in disguise from Austria to England, to 

witness his whole system crash completely beneath the onslaught of 

the very forces for which he had for a generation shown contempt. 

The effect produced by the announcement of Metternich's fall was 

prodigious. It was the most astounding piece of news Europe had 

received since Waterloo. His fall was correctly heralded as the fall 

of a system hitherto impregnable. 



THE MARCH LAWS 

As Hungary, under the spell of Kossuth's oratory, had exerted an 
influence upon Vienna, so now the actions of the Viennese reacted 
upon Hungary. The Hungarian Diet, dominated by the reform 



REVOLUTIONS IN AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA 395 

and national enthusiasm just unchained and constantly fanned by 
Kossuth, passed on ]\Iarch 15 and the days succeeding the famous 
March Laws, by which the process of reforming and modernizing 
Hungary, which had been going on for some years, was given the 
finishing touch. These celebrated laws represented the demands 
of the Hungarian national party led by Kossuth. They swept 
away the old aristocratic political machinery and substituted a mod- 
ern democratic constitution. Feudal dues were abolished, and 
liberty of the press, religious liberty, trial by jury were established.. 
The March Laws also demanded a separate Hungarian ministry, 
composed exclusively of Hungarians. All this w^as conceded by 
Austria under the compulsion of dire necessity (March 31). 

The example of Hungary was speedily followed by Bohemia. 
Here there were two races : the Germans, wealthy, educated, but a 
minority, and the Czechs, a branch of the great Slavic race. Revolution 
poorer, but a majority, ambitious to make Bohemia a separate '"^ Bohemia 
state, subject only to the Emperor. The Bohemians demanded 
(March 19) practically the same things that the Hungarians had 
demanded. The Emperor conceded them. 

The Austrian provinces west of Vienna made somewhat similar 
demands. These too were granted, of course because of the help- 
lessness of the Government. That helplessness was due chiefly 
to the critical situation in Italy. For the Italians had seized in the" 
the propitious moment to attempt the overthrow of Austrian Austrian 

•n TiTii ITT- • , provinces 

influence in Italy. Lombardy and Venetia rose against the 
hated foreigner. Venice, under the inspiring leadership of Daniel 
Manin, restored the republic w^hich Napoleon had suppressed after 
his first campaign. Piedmont threw in its lot with these rebels and 
sent its army forward to aid in the war of liberation. So did other 
Italian states, under popular pressure, Tuscany, the Papal States, 
Naples. At the same time several of these states gained liberal 
constitutions. Italy had thus practically declared her independence. 
Meanwhile there were March Days in Germany, too. The King of 
Prussia promised a constitution, intimidated thereto by an uprising 
of the people of Berlin, which was marked by the erection of Revolution 
barricades, great turbulence, and some bloodshed. He also "> Germany 
promised to lead in the attempt to achieve unity for Germany. 
Preliminary steps were immediately taken to bring this about by a 
great German National Assembly or Parliament, popularly elected 



396 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

for the purpose. This Assembly met two months later in Frankfort 
amid the high hopes of the people. Constitutions were granted by 
their princes to several German states. 

Thus by the end of March, 1848, revolution, universal in its range, 
was everjnvhere successful. The famous March Days had demol- 
ished the system of government which had held sway in 

The March ^ , ^ . ^, , ,..^-^. 

revolutions Europe for a generation. Throughout the Austrian Empire, 
everywhere [^ Germany, and in Italy the revolution was triumphant. 

triumphant j ^ . j t 

Hungary and Bohemia had obtained sweeping concessions ; a 
constitution had been promised the Austrian provinces ; several 
Italian states had obtained constitutions ; the Lombardo- Venetian 
kingdom had declared itself independent of Austria, and the rest 
of Italy was moving to support the rebels ; a constitution had been 
promised Prussia, and a convention was about to meet to give liberty 
and unity to Germany. 



RIVALRIES OF RACES IN AUSTRIA 

But the period of triumph was brief. At the moment of greatest 
humiliation Austria began to show remarkable powers of recovery. 
In the rivalries of her races, and in her army lay her salvation. 
The Government won its first victory, not in Italy, which was the 
Bohemia Critical point, but in Bohemia. There, in March, the Germans 

conquered ^j^j ^y^Q Czechs (cheks) had worked together for the acquisi- 
tion of the reforms described above. But shortly serious differences 
drove the two races apart. These racial animosities, vigorously 
fanned by designing individuals, resulted in a clash between Germans 
and Czechs in the streets of Prague. Windischgratz, commander of 
the imperial troops in Prague, seized this occasion to bombard the 
city (June, 1848). He subdued it and became dictator. The army 
had won its first victory, and that, too, by taking advantage of the 
bitter racial antagonisms in which the Austrian Empire so abounded. 
In Italy also the army was victorious. The Italians, after the first 
flush of enthusiasm, began to be torn by Jealousies and dissensions, 
jj^j The rulers of Tuscany, Naples, and the Papal States deserted 

partially the national cause, leaving Charles Albert of Piedmont, and 

conquered ^^^ Lombard rebels, alone confronting the Austrians under 
Radetzky, a man who had served with credit in every Austrian war 
for sixty years and who now, at the age of eighty-two, was to increase 



ILLIBERAL ATTITUDE OF THE MAGYARS 397 

his reputation. Radetzky defeated Charles Albert at Custozza, 
on July 25, 1848, and then agreed to an armistice of several months, 
expecting to complete his work later. Thus by the middle of the 
summer of 1 848 the Austrian government was again in the saddle in 
Bohemia, and had partially recovered its power in Italy. It was only 
waiting for an opportunity to win back the ground it had lost in 
Hungary. The opportunity came with the outbreak of civil ^^^.^ 
dissension in that country. The racial and national rivalries dissension 
rose to the highest pitch. The Magyars, though a minority of *° angary 
the whole people, had always been dominant and the victory of 
March had been their victory. But the national feeling was strong 
and growing with Serbs, Croatians, and Roumanians. These peoples, 
in the summer of 1848, demanded of the Hungarian Diet much the 
same privileges which the Magyars had won for themselves from the 
Vienna government. They wished local self-government and the 
recognition of their own languages and peculiar customs. To this 
the Magyars would not for a moment consent. They intended that 
there should be but one nationality in Hungary — that of the Mag- 
yars. Individual civil equality should be guaranteed to all the 
inhabitants of the kingdom of whatever race, but no separate or 
partly separate nations, and no other official language than their own. 
They, therefore, refused these demands point-blank. As a conse- 
quence, the bitterest race hatreds broke out in this Hungarian state, 
whose power had been so recently established and was so lightly 
grounded. 

The Magyars would not grant to others the fundamental right 
which they had long so stoutly asserted for themselves, and which 
after vigorous struggles they had won, the right of nationality. 
They began, indeed, forthwith a policy of oppression, a policy of 
Magyarization, of compressing all these various peoples into one 
common mold, of forcible assimilation. This has ever since been 
the open sore in Hungarian politics. 

The Magyars insisted that the Magyar language should be taught 
in all the schools in Croatia and should be used in all official com- 
munications between that province and the central govern- ^^^54^;^ ^^ 
ment in Budapest. The Croatians resented this uncompromis- pioits the 
ing and ungenerous policy and their resentment rapidly became ^'*"^**°° 
rebellion. The Austrian government saw in this dissension the 
chance to regain its lost control. By indirect and tortuous methods 



398 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

it fanned this racial hatred, hoping to profit from the anger of the 
Magyars against the Slavs and of the Slavs against the Magyars. 
Needless to say the tension between Hungary and Austria increased 
daily. Finally in September, 1848, matters were precipitated when 
Jellachich, a man who hated the Hungarians with a deep and abiding 
hatred, and who had been appointed by the Austrian Emperor as 
governor of Croatia, began a civil war by leading an army of Croatians 
and Serbs against the Magyars. The Magyars, the dominant class 
* in Hungary, were resolved to maintain their position against the 
rebellious Slavs and, if Austria supported them, against Austria 
herself. 

On its side the reactionary party in Austria, emboldened by the 

partial successes of the army in Bohemia and Italy, resolved to tighten 

, its grip upon the state. First it forced the Emperor Ferdinand 

Accession of ^ ^^ '^^ '^ 

Francis to abdicate. He was succeeded December 2, 1848, by his 

Joseph I nephew Francis Joseph I, a lad of eighteen, destined to a long 

and eventful reign. The purpose of this manoeuvre was to permit 
by a show of legality the abrogation of the March Laws in Hungary. 
Promises made by Ferdinand, it was held, were not binding upon his 
successor, and the promises of March were henceforth to be repu- 
diated. Matters went rapidly from bad to worse. Austria prepared 
to subdue Hungary as she had subdued Bohemia. Hungary stif- 
fened for the conflict. 

Thus it came about that the year 1849 saw a great war in Hungary. 

The Hungarians, in a frenzy of excitement, led by Kossuth, took the 

Hungarian momentous Step of declaring that the House of Hapsburg, as 

Declaration false and perjured, had ceased to rule ; and that Hungary was 

ence (AprU " an independent nation. Kossuth was appointed President of 

14, 1849) the indivisible state of Hungary. While the word republic was 

not uttered, such would probably be the future form of government 

if the Hungarians succeeded in achieving their independence. 

WAR IN HUNGARY 

But this was not to be. The ungenerous conduct of the Magyars 
toward the other races in Hungary now received its natural reward. 
Not only did the Hungarian armies have to face Austrian troops 
but they had to fight the Slavs of Hungary who, eager for revenge, 
aided the Austrians. The Hungarians achieved some victories 



THE WAR IN HUNGARY 



399 



Joseph I 
helped 
by Czar 



despite these odds, but their action in declaring their country inde- 
pendent complicated the situation disastrously. The matter be- 
came international. Foreign intervention brought this tur- Francis 
bulent chapter abruptly to a close. The young Francis 
Joseph I made an appeal for aid to the Czar of Russia. Nicho- 
las I showed the greatest alacrity in responding. The reasons °' Russia 
that determined him were various. He was both by temperament 

and conviction predisposed 
to aid his fellow-sovereigns 
against revolutionary move- 
ments, if asked. He was an 
autocrat and interested in . 
the preservation of autocracy 
wherever it existed. Also he 
had no desire to see a great 
republic on his very borders. • 
Furthermore, a successful 
Hungary might make a rest- 
less Poland. Many Poles 
were fighting in the Hunga- 
rian armies. 

Russian troops, variously 
estimated at from 100,000 to 

200,000, now poured Hungary 

into Hungary from the conquered 
east and north. The Austri- 
ans again advanced from the 
west. The Hungarians fought 
brilliantly and recklessly, 
urged on by the eloquence of 
Kossuth. They sought the aid of the Turks but did not receive it. 
They even appealed to the Slavs, promising them in adversity the 
rights they had refused in prosperity, but in vain. The overwhelm- 
ing numbers of their opponents rendered the struggle hopeless. Kos- 
suth resigned in favor of Gorgei (ger'-ge-i), a leading general. The 
latter was forced to capitulate at Vilagos, August 13, 1849. The 
war of Hungarian independence was over. Kossuth and others 
fled to Turkey, where they were given refuge. Nicholas proudly 
handed over to Francis Joseph his troublesome Hungary, which 




Francis Joseph I 
At the time of his accession. 



400 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

Austria, if left to her own resources, would probably have been 
unable to conquer. The punishment meted out to the Hungarians 
had no quality of mercy in it. Many generals and civilians were 
hanged. The constitutional privileges were entirely abolished. 
Hungary became a mere province of Austria, and was crushed 
beneath the iron heel. The catastrophe of 1849 seemed the com- 
plete annihilation of that country. 

Meanwhile Italy also had been reconquered by the revived military 

power of Austria. As we have seen, the Italian campaign of 1848 

. against Austria had been led by Charles Albert, King of Sar- 

The conquest ^ r ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i ^ 

of Italy dinia. He had not been successful and had been forced to 

completed ^-^^ ^^ armistice at Custozza in August. But there were 
many republicans in Italy who believed that Charles Albert had been 
only half-hearted, that Italy could never be saved by constitutional 
monarchists. These republicans now decided to carry out their own 
views. They effected revolutions in both Florence and Rome and 
declared both of those states republics. The Grand Duke of Tuscany 
fled to the Kingdom of Naples, as did the Pope. The temporal 
power of the Pope was abolished. 

The result of all these changes was that when the armistice was 
over and Charles Albert took the field in the spring of 1849 against 
Austria he took it alone. The republicans were neither able nor dis- 
posed to aid him. The Italians at this critical moment were divided 
among themselves. Had they been united they would have had 
difficulty enough in their struggle for independence. As it was, the 
case was hopeless. No help came to Charles Albert from the states 
to the south of Piedmont. At Novara, March 23, 1849, the Sardinian 
Abdication ^.rmy was utterly overthrown. The King himself sought 
of Charles death on the battlefield, but in vain. "Even death has cast 
^^^'^ me off," he said. Believing that better terms could be made 

for his country if another sovereign were on the throne, he abdicated 
in favor of his son, Victor Emmanuel II, whose reign, begun in the 
darkest adversity, was destined to be glorious. Passing into exile, 
Charles Albert died a few months later. He had rendered, however, 
a great service to his house and to Italy, for he had shown that there 
was one Italian prince who was willing to risk everything for the 
national cause. He had enlisted the interest and the faith of the 
Italians in the government of Piedmont, in the House of Savoy. 
He was looked upon as a martyr to the national cause. 



THE PARLIAMENT OF FRANKFORT 401 

In the succeeding months the repubhcs of Florence, Rome, and 
Venice were, one after the other, overthrown. The radiant hopes of 
1848 had withered fast. A cruel reaction soon held sway 
throughout most of the peninsula. The power of Austria of the 
was restored, greater apparently than ever. Piedmont alone '■^p"'''"^^ 
preserved a real independence, but was for the time being crushed 
beneath the burdens of a disastrous war and a humiliating peace. 



DEFEAT OF LIBERALISM IN GERMANY 

Meanwhile the victories of the Liberals in Germany were being suc- 
ceeded by defeats. Their hope had centered in the deliberations of 
the Parliament of Frankfort, consisting of nearly six hundred ^^ „ ,. 

^ -' The Parha- 

representatives, elected by universal suffrage. The assembly ment of 
was composed of many able men, but it possessed only a moral '^ °^^ 
authority. Though its existence had not been prevented by the 
rulers of the various states, because they had not dared to oppose 
what the people so plainly desired, still those rulers gave it no positive 
support and played a waiting game, hoping to be able to prevent 
the execution of any decisions unfavorable to themselves. The 
Frankfort Parliament had been summoned in response to a popular 
demand for a real German nation, in place of the hollow mockery of 
the Confederation established in 181 5 at Vienna. It was expected 
to draw up a constitution and it was also expected that this constitu- 
tion would be democratic. Its aim was to achieve not only German 
unity but German political freedom, popular government in place of 
government by absolute monarchs or privileged classes. It was 
hoped that a great free German state would issue from its delibera- 
tions, unity resting upon a large measure of democracy. 

The task was very difficult for various reasons. The union must 
be federal because there were nearly forty states in Germany, each 
with its own history, its own traditions, its own dynasty, ■^^rhy the 
its own fears of the others. Moreover, a federation is difficult problem of 
even between states that are equal in political development, unity was so 
and the political development of the German states was unequal, difficult 
Some states possessed constitutions and parliaments and the people 
had had some experience in self-government. But the leading 
states, Prussia and Austria, had none of these things and were in 
their political development backward. Moreover these two states 



402 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

were rivals and neither was willing to sacrifice its identity and power 
for any such thing as a common German fatherland. There can 
be no federation without a sacrifice of power by the states entering 
it. Moreover the governing classes of both of these states hated 
everything that savored of democracy. 

The Frankfort Parliament failed and the two streams of tendency, 
so characteristic of the century, the tendency toward unity and the 
tendency toward democracy, were dammed up for many decades 
in Germany. Indeed the tendency toward democracy remained 
dammed up until the disastrous outcome of the European War. 

The Parliament failed, to some extent because of the mistakes of 
its members, but chiefly because of the resolute opposition of the 

Hostility of princcs of Germany, and, in particular, of Prussia and Austria. 

the German jf however. Succeeded in drafting a constitution of many high 

princes to . . . 

unity and merits, a constitution nobly planned, which guaranteed civil 
democracy liberty to every German, equality before the law, responsible 
parliamentary control for the central government and for the gov- 
ernment of the separate states. It was decided that the new German 
nation should have the same boundaries as the old Confederation, a 
decision which displeased Austria as she wished to be included with 
all her territories, not with simply a part of them. A most impor- 
tant question was what should be the form of the new government 
and who should be the executive. Should there be an emperor or 
a president or a board, and if an emperor, should his office be heredi- 
tary, or for life, or for a term of years ? Should he be the monarch 
of Prussia or Austria, or should first one and then the other rule? 
The final decision was that Germany should be an hereditary empire, 
and on March 28, 1849, the King of Prussia was chosen to be its 
head. Austria announced curtly that she "would neither let herself 
be expelled from the German Confederation, nor let her German 
provinces be separated from the indivisible monarchy." 

The center of interest now shifted to Berlin, whither a delegation 
went to offer to Frederick William IV the imperial crown of a united 
Germany. Would he accept it? If he would, the new scheme to 
which twenty-eight minor states had already assented would go into 
force, though this might involve a war with Austria, by this time 
largely recovered from her various troubles. Frederick William IV 
had declared in 1847 that he was willing to settle the German ques- 
tion, "with Austria, without Austria, yes, if need be, against Austria." 



THE PARLIAMENT OF FRANKFORT 



403 




'a: S> 



'-- "^ 



H O 



404 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

Now, however, he was in a very different mood. He declined the 
offer of the Frankfort Parhament. The reasons were varied. 
Austria protested that she would never accept a subordinate position, 
and this protest alarmed him. And he disliked the idea of receiving 
a crown from a revolutionary assembly ; rather, in his opinion, ought 
such a gift to come from his equals, the princes of Germany. 

Thus the two great German powers, Austria and Prussia, rejected 

the work of the Frankfort Parliament. Rebuffed in such high 

Rejection of quarters, that body was unable to impose its constitution upon 

^yf' v°^^u^ Germany, and it finally ended its existence wretchedly. In 

fortPariia- session for ovcr a 3^ear it accomplished nothing. But the 

™®°* responsibility for the failure of Germans to achieve a real 

unity in 1848 and 1849 rests primarily not with it, but with the rulers 

of Prussia and Austria. 

The collapse of the Frankfort Parliament was a bitter disappoint- 
ment. It drove a number of the more radical Germans to a bold and 
desperate attempt to establish a republic by force of arms, since these 
monarchs of Germany spurned the work of the Parliament. 

An insurrection broke out in southwest Germany, a section devoted 
to the cause of liberty. The regular troops of Baden joined the insur- 
A republican gen ts, and the movement spread down the Rhine. "Some 
rising Qf |-]^g noblest and most generous spirits in Germany were to 

be found in this last and most desperate venture to maintain the 
cause of liberal unity against the sinister opposition of the German 
crowns. It was all in vain. Democratic idealism fell, not for the 
first or last time, before the trained battalions of Prussia." ^ The 
republicans were shot down or dispersed by Prussian troops in May, 
1849. The republican party in Germany never recovered from this 
blow. 

For men who held democratic and republican ideas and ideals in- 
tensely there was no hope in Germany. Many, not willing to aban- 
Emigration ^on their convictions, their belief in liberty, not wishing to 
of German Uye under a regime which denied the most elementary rights 

Liberals to .,..,,* , . , , , 

the United to individuals, moreover not safe m such states and not de- 
states sired, had only the sad resource of leaving the land of their 
birth, esteeming liberty more precious than subjection to absolute 
monarchs. One of these was Carl Schurz, a Prussian, whose part 
in the revolution of 1848 was most romantic and honorable. He, 

' Fisher, The Republican Tradition in Europe, p. 265. 



RESULTS OF THE MOVEMENTS OF 1848 405 

like many others, emigrated to the United States, with a heavy heart, 
because he believed that the cause of liberty was lost in Germany 
and in Europe, and that he had to make the poignant choice between 
liberty and his native land. Great was the gain of America. If 
these men could not have democratic institutions at home they could 
find them in the New World and could enjoy the opportunities they 
insure. 

The King of Prussia had refused the headship of a united Ger- 
many offered him by the Frankfort Parliament and had thus rendered 
its labors fruitless. But he now attempted to secure the leadership in 
another way, proposing a union of the purely German states under his 
own direction. This meant the exclusion of Austria, so largely non- 
German in her composition. Most of the smaller states joined this 
Prussian Union (1849). This action brought . Prussia into sharp 
conflict with Austria, which had no desire to be edged out of Germany 
and which naturally resented this attempt of Prussia to snatch the 
leadership away from her. Austria therefore, having finally set her 
Hungarian house in order, peremptorily ordered the King of Prussia 
to abandon his schemes, which he forthwith did. This was the 
famous "humiliation of Olmiitz" (ol'-miits). Austria then ^^ ,., 

The humil- 

demanded that the old German Confederation of 1815, which iation of 
had been suspended in 1848, be revived with its Diet at Frank- ^^"*^ 
fort. This was done in 1851. Austria was stronger than ever in 
the Diet. The short-lived Prussian Union was dissolved. 

The permanent results of this mid-century uprising of central 
Europe were very slight. EveryAvhere the old governments slipped 
back into the old grooves and resumed the old traditions. „ ,, , 

" . . Results of 

Two states, however, emerged with constitutions which they the revoiu- 
kept, Sardinia, whose Constitutional Statute granted by ''"'^^ "^ '^'^^ 
Charles Albert on March 4, 1848, established a real constitutional 
and parliamentary government, the onlj^ one in Italy ; and Prussia, 
whose Constitution issued by the King in its final form in 1850 
was far less liberal, yet sufficed to range Prussia among the constitu- 
tional states of Europe. By it the old absolutism of the state was 
changed, at least in form. There was henceforth a parliament con- 
sisting of two chambers. In one respect this document was a bitter 
disappointment to all Liberals. In the March Days of 1848 the 
King had promised universal suffrage, but the Constitution as finally 
promulgated rendered it illusory. It established a system unique in 



406 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 

the world. Universal suffrage was not withdrawn, but was marvel- 
ously manipulated. The voters were divided in each electoral dis- 
trict throughout Prussia into three classes, according to wealth, 
three^^ia^ss The amount of taxes paid by the district was divided into 
system of three equal parts. Those voters who paid the first third were 
grouped into one class, those, more numerous, who paid the 
second third into another class, those who paid the remainder into 
still another class. The result was that a few very rich men were 
set apart by themselves, the less rich by themselves, and the poor by 
themselves. Each of these three groups, voting separately, elected 
an equal number of delegates to a convention, which convention 
chose the delegates of that constituency to the lower house of the 
Prussian Parliament. Thus in every electoral assembly two-thirds 
of the members belonged to the wealthy class. There was no chance 
in such a system for the poor, for the masses. This system, estab- 
lished by the Constitution of 1850, existed in Prussia down to the end 
of the Great War. Thus universal suffrage did not mean democracy : 
it meant plutocracy. 

REFERENCES 

Revolution in Austria : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 707-718, 738- 
770; Andrews, Historical Development of Modern Europe, Vol. I, pp. 363-373; 
Seignobos, The Political History of Europe Since 18 14, pp. 412-419; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 151-156.. 

Kossuth : Thayer, W. R., Throne-Makers. 

Revolution of 1848 in Prussia : Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. 
II, pp. 348-352; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution of Prussia, pp. 305- 
321; Fyffe, pp. 719-722, 785-789. 

The Parliament of Frankfort: Henderson, Vol. II, pp. 360-369; Mar- 
riott and Robertson, pp. 321-330; Fyffe, pp. 725-728, 781-783, 789-799; 
Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 91-100. 

The Revolution of 1848 in Italy : Orsi, Modern Italy, pp. 160-215 ; Cesa- 
resco, Liberation of Italy, pp. 91-164; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 
79-95- 



CHAPTER XIX 

THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC AND THE FOUNDING 
OF THE SECOND EMPIRE 

THE SECOND REPUBLIC 

The Second Republic lasted nominally nearly five years, from Feb- 
ruary 24, 1848, to December 2, 1852, when the Second Empire was 
proclaimed. Practically, however, as we shall see, it came 
to an end one year earlier, December 2, 1851. During this history of the 
period the state was administered successively by the Pro- l®'^"^^- 
visional Government, chosen on February 24, and remaining 
in power for about ten weeks, then for about a year by the National 
Constituent Assembly, which framed the Constitution of the Republic, 
and then by the President and Legislative Assembly, created by that 
constitution. The history of the Republic was to be a very troubled 
one. 

THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT AND THE SOCIALISTS 

The Provisional Government was from the first composed of two 
elements. The larger number, led by Lamartine, were simply 
Republicans, desirous of a republican form of government in 
place of the monarchical. The other element was represented ments in the 
particularly by Louis Blanc, who believed in a republic, but Provisional 

, , , , • , . Government 

as a means to an end, and that end a social, economic revo- 
lution ; who wished primarily to improve the condition of the labor- 
ing classes, to work out in actual laws and institutions the socialistic 
theories propounded with such effectiveness during the later years of 
the reign of Louis Philippe, and particularly the principle represented 
in the famous phrase, "the right to employment." What he most 
desired was not a mere political change, but a thoroughgoing recon- 
struction of society in the interest of the largest and weakest class, 
the poor, the wage-earners. 

407 



4o8 



THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC 



the flag 



The Provisional Government, divided as it was into Socialists and 
Anti-Socialists, ran the risk of all coalitions, that of being reduced 
^j^g to impotence by internal dissensions. Conflicts between the 

question of two great Currents of opinion began on the very day of the proc- 
lamation of the Republic. Armed workmen came in immense 
numbers to the Hotel de Ville (5-ter de vel) and demanded that 

henceforth the banner of 
France should be the red 
flag, emblem of Socialism. 
Lamartine repelled this 
demand in a speech so 
brilliant and so persuasive 
that the workmen them- 
selves stamped upon the 
red flag. 

But the Government, 
achieving an oratorical 
victory, saw itself forced 
to yield to the Socialist 
party in two important 
respects. On motion of 
Louis Blanc, it recognized 
the so-called "right to 
employment." It prom- 
ised work to all citizens, 
and as a means to this 
end it established, against 
its own real wishes, the 
famous National Work- 
shops. 1 1 also established 
a Labor Commission, with 
Blanc at its head and 
with its place of meeting 
the Luxembourg Palace. This was a mere debating society, a body 
to investigate economic questions and report to the Government. 
It had no power of action, or of putting its opinions into execution. 
Moreover, by removing Louis Blanc from the Hotel de Ville to an- 
other part of Paris, the Government really reduced his influence 
and that of his party. Naturally this irritated the Socialists. 




Lamartine ix ii>j_ 
After a lithograph by Chasseriau. 



THE NATIONAL WORKSHOPS 409 

The National Workshops, too, were a source of ultimate disappoint- 
ment to those who had looked to them to solve the complex labor 
problems of the modem industrial system. Conceded by the National 
Provisional Government against its will, and to gain time, that Workshops 
Government did not intend that they should succeed. Their crea- 
tion was intrusted to the Minister of Commerce, Marie, a personal 
enemy of Louis Blanc, who, according to his own admission, was 
willing to make this experiment in order to render the latter unpopular 
and to show workingmen the fallacy of his theories of production, and 
the dangers of such theories for themselves. The scheme was rep- 
resented as Louis Blanc's though it was denounced by him, was 
established especially to discredit him, and was a veritable travesty 
of his ideas. Blanc wished to have every man practice his own 
trade in real factories, started by state aid. They should be en- 
gaged in productive enterprises ; moreover, only men of good char- 
acter should be permitted to join these associations. Instead of 
this, the Government simply set men of the most varied sorts — 
cobblers, carpenters, metal workers, masons, to labor upon unpro- 
ductive tasks, such as making excavations for public works. They 
were organized in a military fashion, and the wages were uniform, 
two francs a day. 

It was properly no system of production that was being tried, but 
a system of relief for the unemployed, who were very numerous owing 
to the fact that many factories had had to close because of the Their rapid 
generally disturbed state of affairs. The number of men growth 
flocking to these National Workshops increased alarmingly : 25,000 
in the middle of March ; 66,000 in the middle of April ; over 100,000 
in May. As there was not work enough for all, the number of work- 
ing days was reduced for each man to two a week, and his total wage 
for the week fixed at eight francs. The result was that large num- 
bers of men were kept idle most of the time, were given wretched 
wages, and had plenty of time to discuss their grievances. They 
furnished excellent material for socialist agitators. This experiment 
wasted the public money, accomplished nothing useful, and led to a 
street war of the most appalling kind. 

The Provisional Government was, as the name signified, only a 
temporary organization whose duty was to administer the state until 
an assembly should be elected to frame a Constitution. The Pro- 
visional Government established universal suffrage and thus politi- 



410 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC 

cal power passed suddenly from the hands of about two hundred 

thousand privileged wealthy persons to over nine million elec- 

Nationai tors. The elections were held on April 23, and the National 

Constituent Constituent Assembly met on May 4, 1848. The assembly 

consisted of nine hundred men, about eight hundred of them 

Moderate Republicans. The Socialists had almost disappeared. 



THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY 

The Assembly showed at once that it was bitterly opposed to the 
opinions of the Socialists of Paris. The Provisional Government now 
Assembly laid down its powers, and the Assembly chose five of its mem- 
to°the^ bers, all Anti-Socialists, with Lamartine as the head, as the 

Socialists new executive until the Constitution should be drawn up. All 
these men had been opposed to Louis Blanc. The Government, 
believing that the National Workshops were breeding-spots of 
Socialism and dangerous unrest, resolved to root them out. It an- 
nounced their immediate abolition, giving the workmen the 
of the alternative of enrolling in the army or going into the country to 

National labor on public works. If they did not leave voluntarily, they 

Workshops , , , r , i ^, i , i i -, . 

would be forced to leave. Fhe laborers, goaded to desperation, 
prepared to resist and to overthrow this Government which they had 
helped bring into existence, and which had proved so unsympathetic. 
Organized as a semi-military force, angered at the hostility of the 
bourgeoisie to all helpful social reform that could make their lives 
easier, they began a bitter fight. The Assembly saw the terrible 
The June nature of the conflict impending. General Cavaignac (ka-van- 
Days yak') was given dictatorial powers by the Assembly, the Execu- 

tive Commission of five resigning. During four June days (June 
23-26, 1848) the most fearful street fighting Paris had ever known 
went on behind a baffling network of barricades. The issue was 
long doubtful, but finally the insurgents were put down. The cost 
was terrible. Ten thousand were killed or wounded. Eleven 
thousand prisoners were taken, and their deportation was imme- 
diately decreed by the Assembly. The June Days left among the 
poor an enduring legacy of hatred toward the bourgeoisie. 
A military The Moderate Republicans had definitely triumphed over 

dictatorship ^^g Socialistic Republicans. But so narrow had been their 
escape, so fearful were they for the future that the dictatorship of 



THE CONSTITUTION OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC 411 

Cavaignac was continued until the end of October. Thus the 
Second Repubhc, proclaimed in February, 1848, after ten troubled 
weeks under a Provisional Government, passed under military- 
leadership for the next four months. One-man power was rapidly 
developing. 

The results of this socialist agitation and of the sanguinary Days of 
June were lamentable and far-reaching. The republic was immeas- 
urably weakened by this dreadful fratricidal strife. It was gravely 
wounded in the house of its friends. 



THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC 

After the suppression of the Socialists in June the Assembly pro- 
ceeded to frame the constitution, for which task it had been chosen. 
It proclaimed the Republic as the definitive government of ^, , 

T- Till- ^ rr ^^^ framing 

r ranee. It declared universal suffrage. It provided that of the con - 
there should be a legislature consisting of a single chamber, ^'^*"t'°'i 
composed of 750 members, chosen for three years, to be renewed in 
full a.t the end of that period. 

The executive was to be a president elected for four years and 
ineligible for reelection save after a four years' interval. He was 
given very considerable powers. It was felt that the danger 
in giving him these would be neutralized by the shortness of of the 
his term and by his inability to be immediately reelected. ^*®'="**^^ 
How he should be chosen was the most important question before 
the Constituent Assembly, and was long debated. The Assembly, 
dominated by its fundamental dogma of universal suffrage and 
popular sovereignty, was disposed to have the president chosen 
by all the voters. The danger in this procedure lay in the 
lack of political experience of the French electorate, and the concerning 
probability that they would be blinded by some distinguished *^® P'^^^i- 
or famous name in making their choice, not guided by an 
intelligent analysis of character and of fitness for the high office. 
It was, however, decided that the people should choose the president 
and should be entirely untrammeled in their choice. In thus leaving 
the choice of the president to universal suffrage, this republican 
assembly was playing directly into the hands of a pretender to a 
throne, of a man who believed he had the right to rule France by 
reason of his birth, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, nephew of the Great 



412 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC 

Napoleon and legitimate heir to his pretensions. At the time of the 
February Revolution this man was practically without influence or 
significance, but so swiftly did events move and opinion shift in that 
year 1848 that by the time the mode of choosing the president was 
decided upon, he was already known to be a leading candidate, a 
fact which stamped that decision as all the more foolhardy. 

Louis Napoleon Bonaparte had become chief of the house of Bona- 
parte in 1832 at the age of twenty-four, on the death of Napoleon's 
son, known as the "King of Rome." He was the son of Louis, the 
former King of Holland. He conceived his position with 
Napoleon utmost scriousness. He believed that he had a right to rule 
Bonaparte ^^^^ France, and that the day would come when he would. 
He adhered to this belief for sixteen years, though those years brought 
him no practical encouragement, but only the reverse. Gathering 
about him a few adventurers, he attempted in 1836, at Strasburg, 
and in 1840, at Boulogne, to seize power. Both attempts were puerile 
in their conception, and were bunglingly executed. Both ended in 
fiasco. He had gained the name of being ridiculous, a thing exceed- 
ingly difficult for Frenchmen to forgive or forget. As a result of the 
former attempt he had been exiled to the United States, from which 
country he shortly returned. As a result of the latter he was im- 
prisoned in the fortress of Ham in northern France, from which he 
escaped in 1846, disguised as an ordinary mason, named Badinguet. 
He then went to England and in 1848, at the time of the Chartist 
risings, he was a special constable stationed in Trafalgar Square. 
This was certainly no record of achievement. But the stars in their 
courses were fighting for him. The Revolution of 1848 created his 
opportunity, as that of 1789 had created that of the First Napoleon. 
Like his great prototype, whom he constantly sought to imitate, he 
offered his services to the Republic. He was elected a member of 
the Constituent Assembly, where the impression he created was that 
of a mediocre man, with few ideas of his own, who could prob- 
of aTe"^^"^ ably be controlled by others. His name, however, was a 
Constituent name to conjure with. This was his only capital, but it was 
^^^™ sufficient. The word Napoleon was seen to be a marvelous 

vote-winner with the peasants, who, now that universal suffrage 
was the law of the land, formed the great majority. "How should I 
not vote for this gentleman," said a peasant to Montalembert, "I 
whose nose was frozen at Moscow?" Louis Napoleon was an 



ELECTION OF THE PRINCE PRESIDENT 413 

avowed candidate for the presidency, and, as the most colorless, was 
the strongest. Cavaignac was the candidate of the democratic 
Republicans, who had governed France since February, but 
he was now hated by the workingmen for his part in the for the 
June Days. Thus when the presidential election was held in P''^s''*®''*=y 
December, 1848, Louis Napoleon was overwhelmingly chosen with 
over five million votes to Cavaignac's million and a half. The new 
President entered upon his duties December 20, 1848. On that 
day before the Assembly he swore "to remain faithful to the demo- 
cratic republic," and said: "My duty is clear. I will fulfill it as a 
man of honor. I shall regard as enemies of the country all those 
who endeavor to change by illegal means that which France has 
established." He kept his oath for nearly three years and then he 
broke it, because he wished to remain in power, having no desire to 
retire to private life ; yet the Constitution forbade the reelection of a 
president at the end of the four-year term. Louis Napoleon therefore 
took a leaf out of the biography of Napoleon I, and climbed to power 
by carrying through a coup d'etat, far more skillfully than his uncle 
had engineered that of the 19th of Brumaire. 



THE COUP D'ETAT 

The 2d of December, 1851, anniversary of the coronation of Napo- 
leon I and of the battle of Austerlitz, was chosen as the fateful day. 
During the early morning hours many of the military and civil 
leaders of France, republican and monarchist, were arrested in bed 
and taken to prison. A battalion of infantry was sent to occupy 
the Legislative Chamber. Placards were posted on all the walls of 
Paris, pretending to explain the President's purposes, which included 
a remodeling of the constitution in the direction of the system 
established by Napoleon I at the time of the Consulate. "This 
system, created by the First Consul at the beginning of the century, 
has already given to France repose and prosperity ; it will guarantee 
them to her again." The people were called upon to approve or 
disapprove these suggestions. 

The significance of all this was at first not apparent to those who 
read the placards. But signs of opposition began to show Events of 
themselves as their meaning became clearer. Some of the December 2 
deputies, going to their hall of meeting, found entrance prevented by 



414 



THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC 



The 

" massacre 

of the 

boulevards 



the military. Withdrawing to another place, and proceeding to 
impeach the President, they were attacked by the troops, who 
arrested a large number, and took them off to prison. Thus the 
leaders of France, civil and military, were in custody, and the Presi- 
dent saw no organized authority erect before him. This was the 
work of December 2. Would the people resent the high-handed 
acts of this usurper ? 

The President had not neglected to make unprecedented prepara- 
tions for this contingency. His police controlled all the printing 
establishments, whence 
usually in periods of crisis 
emerged flaming appeals 
to revolt ; also all the 
bell towers, whence in 
revolutionary times the 
tocsin was accustomed to 
ring out the appeal to in- 
surrection. Nevertheless, 
on the 3d, barricades were 
raised. On the 4th oc- 
curred the famous " mas- 
sacre of the boulevards." 

Over 1 50 were killed 

and a large number 

wounded. Paris 

was cowed. The 
coup d'etat was crowned 
with success. To prevent 
any possible rising of the 
provinces martial law was 
proclaimed in thirty-two 

departments, thousands of arbitrary arrests were made, and the 
work on which the Prince President entered on the night of Decem- 
ber 2d was thoroughly carried out. Probably a hundred thousand 
arrests were made throughout France. All who appeared danger- 
ous to Louis Napoleon were either transported, exiled, or im- 
prisoned. This vigorous policy was aimed particularly at the 
Republicans, who were for years completely silenced. 

Having thus abolished all opposing leadership, Louis Napoleon ap- 




Napoleon III 



THE PRINCE PRESIDENT BECOMES EMPEROR 415 

pealed to the people for their opinion as to intrusting him with power 
to remodel the Constitution along the lines indicated in his proclama- 
tion. On December 20, 7,439,216 voted in favor of so doing. The 
and only 640,737 voted in the negative. While the election plebiscite 
was in no sense fair, while the issue presented was neither clear nor 
simple, while force and intimidation were resorted to, yet it was 
evident that a large majority of Frenchmen were willing to try again 
the experiment of a Napoleon. 

The Republic, though officially continuing another year, was now 
dead. Louis Napoleon, though still nominally President, was in fact 
an absolute sovereign. It was a mere detail when a year later „ , „. 

^ •' JNapoleon 111. 

(November 21, 1852) the people of France were permitted to Emperor, 
vote on the question of reestablishing the imperial dignity, ^*^' ^' ' ^^ 
and of proclaiming Louis Napoleon Bonaparte emperor, under the 
name of Napoleon III. 7,824,189 Frenchmen voted yes; 253,145 
voted no. On the anniversary of the coup d'etat, December 2, a 
day so fortunate for Bonapartes, Napoleon III was proclaimed 
Emperor of the French, and the Second Empire was established. 



THE SECOND EMPIRE 

The President who, by the endless witchery of a name, by a profit- 
able absence of scruples, and by favorable circumstances, had known 
how to become an Emperor, was destined to be the ruler of France 
and a leading figure in European politics for eighteen years. He an- 
nounced at the outset that what France needed, after so turbulent a 
history, was government by an enlightened and benevolent despot. 
Then when the necessary work of reorganization had been 
carried through and the national life was once more in a gram of 
healthy state, the autocratic would give way to a liberal form *?« "^w 

1111- T- Emperor 

of government which the country would then be m a condition 
to manage and enjoy. As a matter of fact the history of the Second 
Empire falls into these two divisions — autocracy unlimited from 
1852 to i860, and a growing liberalism from i860 to 1870, when 
the Empire collapsed, its program woefully unrealized. 

The political institutions of the Empire were largely based on 
those of the Consulate. The machinery was elaborate but was 
mainly designed to deceive the French people into thinking that 
they enjoyed self-government. The principle of universal suffrage 



4i6 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC 

was preserved but was ingeniously rendered quite harmless to the 

autocrat. There was a Legislative Body and there was a Senate, 

but their powers were very slight. The important fact was not 

institution^ the activity of these various bodies but of the one man. France 

of the ^as no longer a land of freedom. Since 1 8 1 5 under the vari- 

"^"^^ ous regimes Parliament had been a serious factor in the life 

of the nation and men had had a training in political affairs. That 

promising development was now abruptly stopped. Repression 

was the order of the day. Particular ruthlessness was shown in the 

policy of crushing the Republicans, as Napoleon HI had a very clear 

instinct that they would never forgive him for overthrowing by 

violence the Republic which had honored him with its highest office 

and which he had solemnly sworn to protect from all enemies. 

In politics a despot and a reactionary, stamping out every possible 

spark of independence. Napoleon was, however, in many other ways 

progressive. Particularly did he seek to develop the wealth 

both^^reT- ^i the country and his reign was one of increasing economic 

sive and prosperity ; manufactures, commerce, banking, all were 

progressive , it. ■ ^ r , 1 • 

greatly encouraged. It was a period of great busmess enter- 
prises and fortunes were made quickly, and of a size hitherto unknown 
in France. Paris was modernized and beautified on a most elaborate 
scale and became the most attractive and comfortable capital in 
Europe. In 1853 Napoleon III married a young Spanish lady of 
remarkable beauty and of noble birth, Mile. Eugenie de Montijo, "a 
marriage of love" as the Emperor told the French people. The 
Tuileries immediately became the center of a court life the most 
brilliant and luxurious of the nineteenth century. 

In 1856 Napoleon III was at the zenith of his power. The Empire 
had been recognized by all the other states of Europe. The Emperor 

had, with England and Piedmont as allies, waged a sue- 

Xne 

Congress of cessful War against Russia in the Crimea. He was supposed 
Pans, 185 ^Q have the best army in Europe, and he was honored in the 
face of all the world by having Paris chosen as the seat of the con- 
gress which drew up the treaties at the end of that war. And now 
an heir was born to him, the Prince Imperial, as interesting in his 
day and as ill-fated as the King of Rome had been in his. Fortune 
seemed to have emptied her full horn of plenty upon the author of the 
coup d'etat. 

But the Empire had already reached its apogee, though this was 



THE EMPRESS 



417 




Empress Eugenie 
After the painting by Winterhalter. 



4i8 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC 

not evident for some time. Had Napoleon limited his activity to the 

improvement and development of conditions at home his reign 

The forei n i^iight have Continued successful and advantageous. But he 

policy of adopted a showy and risky foreign policy, whose consequences 

apo eon j^^ ^-^ ^^^ foresee and which in the end entangled him in 

hopeless embarrassments and led directly to the violent and tragic 

overthrow of his Empire and the endless humiliation and suffering 

of France. The foreign policy reacted, after i860, upon the home 

policy in a decided manner. The beginning of Napoleon's serious 

troubles was his participation in the Italian war of 1859. 

To Ainderstand the course of the Second Empire from i860 to 1870 
one must study the part played by Napoleon III in the making of 
modern Italy, the consequences of which were to be for him so 
unexpected, so far-reaching, and in the end so disastrous. And 
correctly to appraise that policy we must first trace the history of 
the rise of the Kingdom of Italy. 

REFERENCES 

The SECO^^D Republic : Fisher, The Republican Tradition in Europe, Chap. 
VIII, pp. 202-228; Lebon, Modern France, Chap. XI, pp. 261-290; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. V, pp. 96-141. 

The Napoleonic Legend : Fisher, Bonapartism, Chap. IV, pp. 64-79. 

Early Life of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte : Forbes, A., Life of Napoleon 
the Third, pp. 1-58. 

The Strasburg and Boulogne Incidents : Forbes, pp. 59-107. 

The Coupd'Etat: Murdock, Reconstruction of Europe, Chap. II, pp. 7-15; 
Forbes, Chap. VII, pp. 127-148; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 134- 
141. 

The Early Years of the Empire : Fisher, pp. 80-99. 



CHAPTER XX 

THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

Italy, as we have seen, was a land of small states, of arbitrary gov- 
ernment, and of Austrian domination. The spirit of nationality, the 
spirit of freedom were nowhere recognized. Indeed, every 
effort was made to stamp them out whenever they appeared, in^^ify a'nl 
Thus far these efforts had been successful. They were now ^'■^^'^"™ 
about to break down utterly and a noble and stirring movement 
of reform was to sweep over the peninsula in triumph, completely 
transforming and immensely enriching a land which, greatly endowed 
by nature, had been sadly treated by man. 

MAZZINI THE FOUNDER OF "YOUNG ITALY" 

The deepest aspirations of the Italian people had finally found a 
voice, clear, bold, and altogether thrilling, in the person of Joseph 
INIazzini. Mazzini (mat-se'-ne) was the spiritual force of the 

T 1 • Ti • • • 1 • • , Joseph 

Italian Risorgimento or resurrection, as this national move- Mazzini 
ment was called, the prophet of a state that was not yet but (^8°5"i872) 
was to be, destined from youth to feel with extraordinary intensity a 
holy mission imposed upon him. He was born in 1805 in Genoa, his 
father being a physician and a professor in the universit}'. Even in 
his boyhood he was morbidly impressed with the unhappiness and 
misery of his country. "In the midst of the noisy, tumultuous life 
of the students around me I was," he says, in his interesting though 
fragmentary autobiography, "somber and absorbed and appeared 
like one suddenly grown old. I childishly determined to dress 
always in black, fancying myself in mourning for my country." 

As Mazzini grew up all his inclinations were toward a literary life. 
"A thousand visions of historical dramas and romances floated before 
my mental eye." But this dream he abandoned, "my first great 
sacrifice," for political agitation. He joined the Carbonari, not 

419 



420 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 



because he approved even then of their methods, but because at 
least they were a revolutionary organization. As a member of it, 
he was arrested in 1830. The governor of Genoa told Mazzini's 
father that his son was "gifted with sonje talent," but was "too 
Hisimpris- fond of Walking by himself at night absorbed in thought. 
onment What on earth has he at his age to think about? We don't 

like young people thinking without our knowing the subject of their 
thoughts." Mazzini was 
imprisoned in the fortress 
ofSavona. Here he could 
only see the sky and the 
sea, "the two grandest 
things in Nature, except 
the Alps," he said. After 
six months he was re- 
leased, but was forced to 
leave his country. For 
nearly all of forty years 
he was to lead the bitter 
life of an exile in France, 
in Switzerland, but chiefly 
in England, which became 
his second home. 

After his release from 
prison Mazzini founded in 
1 83 1 a society, "Young 

Italy," destined to 

be an important 

factor in making the 
new Italy. The Carbo- 
nari had led two revolutions and had failed. Moreover, he disliked 
that organization as being merely destructive in its aim, having no 
definite plan of reconstruction. "Revolutions," he said, "must be 
made by the people and for the people." His own society must be a 
secret organization ; otherwise it would be stamped out. But it must 
not be merely a body of conspirators ; it must be educative, proselyt- 
jn^, seeking to win Italians by its moral and intellectual fervor to an 
idealistic view of life, a self-sacrificing sense of duty. Only those under 
forty were to be admitted to membership, because his appeal was par- 



Founder of 

" Young 
Italy " 




Joseph Mazzini 



GIUSEPPE MAZZINI 421 

ticularly to the young. "Place youth at the head of the msurgent 
multitude," he said ; "you know not the secret of the power hidden 
in these j^outhful hearts, nor the magic influence exercised on the 
masses by the voice of youth. You will find among the young a host 
of apostles of the new religion." With Mazzini the liberation and 
unification of Italy was indeed a new religion, appealing to the 
loftiest emotions, entailing complete self-sacrifice, complete ^j^^ 
absorption in the ideal, and the young were to be its apostles, methods of 
Theirs was to be a missionary life. He told them to travel, ^ society 
to bear from land to land, from village to village, the torch of liberty, 
to expound its advantage to the people, to establish and consecrate 
the "tult. Let them not quail before the horrors of torture and 
imprisonment that might await them in the holy cause. "Ideas 
grow quickly when watered with the blood of martyrs." Never 
did a cause have a more dauntless leader, a man of purity of life, 
a man of imagination, of poetry, of audacity, gifted, moreover, with a 
marvelous command of persuasive language and with burning 
enthusiasm in his heart. The response was overwhelming. By 1833 
the- society reckoned 60,000 members. Branches were founded 
ever>^where. Garibaldi, whose name men were later to conjure with, 
joined it on the shores of the Black Sea. This is the romantic 
proselyting movement of the nineteenth century, all the more 
remarkable from the fact that its members were unknown men, 
bringing to their work no advantage of wealth or social position. 
But, as their leader wrote later, "All great national movements 
begin with the unknown men of the people, 'without influence except 
for the faith and will that counts not time or difficulties." 

The program of this society was clear and emphatic. First, Austria 
must be driven out. This was the condition precedent to all success. 
War must come — the sooner the better. Let not Italians rely The aims of 
on the aid of foreign governments, upon diplomacy, but upon ^^^ society 
their own unaided strength. Austria could not stand against a 
nation of twenty millions fighting for their rights. "The only thing 
wanting to twenty millions of Italians, desirous of emancipating 
themselves, is not power, hntfaiih,'' he said. 



422 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

THE PROBLEM OF THE MAKING OF ITALY 

At a time when the obstacles seemed insuperable, when but few 
Italians dreamed of unity even as an ultimate ideal, Mazzini declared 
Unity a ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^ practicable ideal, that the seemingly impossible 

practicable was easily possible if only Italians would dare to show their 
power-; and his great significance in Italian history is that he suc- 
ceeded in imparting his burning faith to multitudes of others. Mazzini 
was a republican and he wished his country, when united, to be a re- 
public. That a solution of the Italian problem lay in combining the 
existing states into a federation he did not for a moment believe. 
Every argument for federation was a stronger argument for unity. 
" Never rise in any other name than that of Italy and of all Italy." 
Mazzini worked at a great disadvantage as he was early expelled 
from his own country and was compelled to spend nearly all his life- 
time as an exile in London, hampered by paltry resources, and cut 
off from that intimate association with his own people which is so 
essential to effective leadership. 

Italy was not made as Mazzini wished it to be, as we shall see ; 
nevertheless is he one of the chief of the makers of Italy. He and the 
society he founded constituted a leavening, quickening force in the 
realm of ideas. Around them grew up a patriotism for a country 
that existed as yet only in the imagination. 

But to many serious students of the Italian problem Mazzini 
seemed far too radical ; seemed a mystic and a rhetorician full of 
resounding and thrilling phrases, but with little practical sense. 
Men of conservative temperament could not follow him. There was 
a considerable variety of opinion. Some believed in independence as 
A variety fervidly as did he but did not believe in the possibility of Italian 
of opinions unity, for Italy had been too long divided, the divisions were 
proposas ^^^ deep-seated. Some believed, not in a single state of Italy 
but in a federation of the various states, with the Pope as president or 
leader. Others criticized this as a preposterous idea and denounced 
the Pope's government of his own states in scathing terms. Still 
others held that Italy was not at all republican in sentiment but was 
thoroughly monarchical and that a monarchy would be the natural 
form of its government. Some argued that, as it was impossible to 
drive the Austrians out, they should be included in the federation ; 
and some thought that, though the Austrians could not be driven out, 



THE LEADERSHIP OF PIEDMONT 423 

they might be bribed to leave by being offered fat pickings in the 
Balkan peninsula at the expense of the Turks. Austria might thus, 
for a consideration, make Italy a present of her independence, 
certainly a fanciful idea. Out of this fermentation of ideas grew a 
more vigorous spirit of unrest, of dissatisfaction, of aspiration. 

The events of 1848 and 1849 gave a decided twist to Italian evolu- 
tion. At one moment Italy had appeared to be on the very j^ action in 
point of achieving her independence and her unity. Then Italy after 
the reverses had come and she relapsed into her former condi- ' "^ 
tion. It seemed as if everything was to be as it had been, only worse 
because of all these blasted hopes and fruitless struggles. But 
things were not exactly as they had been. In one quarter there 
was a change, emphatically for the better. One state in the peninsula 
formed a brilliant exception to this sorry system of reaction — Pied- 
mont. Though badly defeated on the battlefield at Custozza in 1 848, 
and at Novara in 1 849, it had gained an important moral victory. An 
Italian prince had risked his throne twice for the cause of Italian inde- 
pendence, conduct which for multitudes marked the House of Savoy 
as the leader of the future. Moreover, the king who had done this, 
Charles Albert, had also granted his people a constitution. He had 
abdicated after the battle of Novara, and his son, Victor Emman- 
uel II, then twenty-nine years of age, had come to the throne. 

Austria offered V'ictor Emmanuel easy terms of peace if he would 
abrogate this constitution, Austria not liking constitutions anywhere 
and particularly^ in a state that was a neighbor, and prospects 
of aggrandizement were dangled before him. He absolutely Emmanuel 
refused. This was a turning point in his career, in the his- ^^ (1820- 
tory of Piedmont, and in that of Italy. It won him the pop- 
ular title of the Honest King. It made Piedmont the one hope 
of Italian Liberals. She was national and constitutional. „. . 

Piedmont a 

Henceforth her leadership was assured. For the next ten constitutional 
years her history is the history of the making of the Kingdom ^*^*^ 
of Italy. Thither Liberals who were driven out of the other states 
took refuge, and their number was large. 

Victor Emmanuel was a brave soldier, a man, not of brilliant mind, 
but of sound and independent judgment, of absolute loyalty to his 
word, of intense patriotism. And he had from 1850 on, in his leading 
minister, Count Camillo di Cavour, one of the greatest statesmen 
and diplomatists of the nineteenth century. 



424 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

CAVOUR, PRIME MINISTER OF PIEDMONT 

Cavour was born in 1810. His family belonged to the nobility of 
Piedmont. He received a military education and joined the army as 
an engineer. But by his liberal opinions, freely expressed, 
Cavour he incurred the hostility of his superiors and was kept for a 

(1810-1861) ^-^g -j^ semi-imprisonment. He resigned his commission 
in 1 83 1, and for the next fifteen years lived the life of a country 
gentleman, developing his estates. During these years, to vary 
the monotony of existence, he visited France and England repeatedly, 
interested particularly in political and economic questions. He was 
anxious to play a part in politics himself, though he saw no chance in 
a country as yet without representative institutions. " Oh ! if I were 
an Englishman," he said, "by this time I should be something, and my 
name would not be wholly unknown." Meanwhile, he studied abroad 
the institutions he desired for his own country, particularly 
S'poiidcaT* the English parliamentary system. Night after night he 
and economic g^^ j^ ^^g gallery of the House of Commons, seeking to make 
himself thoroughly familiar with its modes of procedure. 
He welcomed with enthusiasm the creation in 1848 of a parliament 
for Piedmont and of a constitution, which he had, indeed, been one 
of the boldest to demand. "Italy," he said, "must make herself 
by means of liberty, or we must give up trying to make her." This 
belief in parliamentary institutions Cavour held tenaciously all 
through his life, even when at times they seemed to be a hindrance 
to his policies. He believed that in the end, sooner or later, the 
people reach the truth of a matter. He was elected to the first 
Piedmontese Parliament, was taken into the cabinet in 1850, and 
became prime minister in 1852. He held this position for the 
remainder of his life, with the exception of a few weeks, proving him- 
self a great statesman and an incomparable diplomat. 

Cavour's mind was the opposite of Mazzini's, practical, positive, 
not poetical and speculative. He desired the unity and the independ- 
Cavourand ^nce of Italy. He hated Austria as the oppressor of his coun- 
Mazzini ^j-y^ as an Oppressor everywhere. But, unlike Mazzini, he did 

not underestimate her power, nor did he overestimate the power of 
his own countrymen. Cavour believed, as did all the patriots, that 
Austria must be driven out of Italy before any Italian regeneration 
could be achieved. But he did not believe with Mazzini and others 



THE PERSONALITY OF CAVOUR 



425 



that the Itahans could accompUsh this feat alone. In his opinion 
the history of the last forty years had shown that plots and insur- 
rections would not avail. It was essential to win the aid of a great 
military power comparable in strength and discipline to Austria. 

Cavour considered that the only possible leader in the work of free- 
ing and unifying Italy was the House of Savoy and the Piedmontese 

monarchy, and he cavour seeks 
felt that the proper *°. °^^^^ , 

•^^ '■ Piedmont a 

government of the model state 
new state, if it should ever 
arise, would be a consti- 
tutional monarchy. He 
wished to make Piedmont 
a model state so that, when 
the time came, the Italians 
of other states would rec- 
ognize her leadership and 
join in her exaltation as 
best for them all. Pied- 
mont had a constitution 
and the other states had 
not. He saw to it that 
she had a free political 
life and received a genu- 
ine training in self-govern- 
ment. Also he bent every 
energy to the development 
of the economic resources 
of his kingdom, by encour- 
aging manufactures, by stimulating commerce, by modernizing agri- 
culture, by building railroads. In a word he sought to make and did 
make Piedmont a model small state, liberal and progressive, hoping 
thus to win for her the Italians of the other states and the interest 
and approval of the countries and rulers of western Europe. 

The fundamental purpose, the constant preoccupation of this 
man's life, determining every action, prompting every wish, was to 
gain a Great Power as an ally. In the pursuit of this elusive and 
supremely difficult object, year in, year out, Cavour displayed his 
measure as a diplomat, and stood forth finally without a peer. It 




CWOUR 

From a lithograph by Desmaisons. 



426 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

is a marvelously absorbing story, from which we are precluded here 
because it cannot be properly presented except at length. The reader 
Cavour an niust go clscwhere for the details of this fascinating record, 
incomparable in which were combined, in rare harmony, sound judgment, 
ipoma practical sense, powers of clear, subtle, penetrating thought, 

unfailing attention to prosaic details, with imagination, audac- 
ity, courage, and iron nerve. A profound and accurate knowl- 
edge of the forces and personalities in the political life of Italy and 
of Europe, tact and sureness in appreciating the shifting scenes of 
the international stage, never-failing resourcefulness in the service 
of a steady purpose, such were some of the characteristics of this 
master in statecraft and diplomacy. Though the minister of a petty 
state of only five million people, his was the most dynamic person- 
ality in Europe. 

CAVOUR AND A FRENCH ALLIANCE 

Cavour was seeking an ally. He saw that the field was limited. 
It must be either England or France. The former country had no 
large army and was disposed to keep itself as free from European 
entanglements as possible. France, on the other hand, was supposed 
to have the best army in Europe and her ruler, Napoleon III, was 
an ambitious and adventurous person. "Whether we like it or 
not," said Cavour, " our destinies depend upon France." He sought 
to ingratiate himself with Napoleon. The Crimean War gave an 
Why Pied- Opportunity. Piedmont made an unconditional and very 
mont partici- risky alliance in 1855 with France and England, then at war 
the^Crimean with Russia, and rendered a distinct service to them. The}'' 
War ill turn rendered her the service of securing her admittance to 

the Congress of Paris which terminated that war, of thus securing 
her recognition as an equal among the powers of Europe. They also 
gave Cavour a chance to discuss the Italian question in an interna- 
tional gathering in which Austria sat. 

Two years later Cavour received his great reward. Napoleon III 
The inter- bade him come to Plombieres (plon-byar'), a watering place in 
view at the Vosgcs (vozh) mountains, where the Emperor was taking 

(July 21^^ ^^^ cure. And there in a famous carriage drive which these 
1858) two took through the forests of the Vosges, Napoleon holding 

the reins, and in subsequent interviews, they plotted to bring 



THE ALLIANCE OF FRANCE AND SARDINIA 427 

about a war which should result in driving Austria out of Italy. 
Italy was to be freed "from the Alps to the Adriatic." Piedmont 
should be given Lombardy and Venetia and a part of the Papal 
States. The Italian states should then be united in a confederation 
with the Pope as president. France should receive Savoy, and 
possibly Nice. 

Such was the understanding of Plombieres. The motives that in- 
fluenced Napoleon to take this step which was to be momentous for 
himself as well as for Italy were numerous. The principle 
of nationality which he held tenaciously, and which largely and the 
determined the foreign policy of his entire reign, prompted ^"^'^^^^^^^ 
him in this direction — the principle, namely, that people of 
the same race and language had the right to be united politically if 
they wished to be. Further, Napoleon had long been interested in 
Italy. He had himself taken part in the revolutionary movements 
there in 1831, and had probably been a member of the Carbonari. 
Moreover, it was one of his ambitions to tear up the treaties of 18 15, 
treaties that sealed the humiliation of the Napoleonic dynasty. 
These treaties still formed the basis of the Italian political system 
in 1858. Again, he was probably lured on by a desire to win glory 
for his throne, and there was always the chance, too, of gaining 
territory. 

Thus in 1 859 there came about a war between Austria on the one 
hand and Piedmont and France on the other. The latter were 
victorious in two great battles, that of Magenta (ma-jen'-ta) The war 
(June 4) and of Solferino (June 24). The Iktter was one of °^ ^^sp 
the greatest battles of the nineteenth century. It lasted eleven 
hours, more than 260,000 men were engaged, nearly 800 cannon. 
The allies lost over 17,000 men, the Austrians about 22,000. All 
Lombardy was conquered, and Milan was occupied. It seemed that 
Venetia could be easily overrun and the termination of Austrian 
rule in Italy efifected, and Napoleon's statement that he would free 
Italy "from the Alps to the Adriatic" accomplished. Suddenly 
Napoleon halted in the full tide of success, sought an interview 
with the Emperor of Austria at Villafranca, and there on J.^^. P""?" , 

Iiminaries of 

Jul}^ II, without consulting the wishes of his ally, concluded viiiafranca 
a famous armistice. The terms agreed upon by the two 
Emperors were : that Lombardy should pass to Piedmont, that 
Austria should retain Venetia, that the Italian states should form a 



428 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

confederation, that the rulers of Tuscany and Modena should be 
restored to their states, whence they had just been driven by popular 
uprisings. 

Why had Napoleon stopped in the middle of a successful campaign, 

and before he had accomplished the object for which he had come into 

T3»oo«„o. f Italy? There were several reasons. He had been shocked 

Reasons for -^ 

Napoleon's by the horrors of the battlefield. He saw that the comple- 
tion of the conquest of Austria meant a far larger sacrifice 
of life. Prussia was preparing to intervene. Moreover Napoleon 
became apprehensive about the results of his policy. If it should end 
in the creation of a strong national kingdom, as seemed likely, would 
not this be dangerous to France? A somewhat enlarged Piedmont 
was one thing, but a kingdom of all Italy, neighbor to France, was 
something very different. 

The news of the peace came as a cruel disappointment to the Ital- 
ians, dashing their hopes just as they were apparently about to be 
realized. The Government of Victor Emmanuel had not even been 
consulted. In intense indignation at the faithlessness of Napoleon, 
overwrought by the excessive strain under, which he had long been 
laboring, Cavour completely lost his self-control, urged desperate 
measures upon the King and, when they were declined, in a fit 

of^Cavour°'* of rage, threw up his office. The King by overruling Cavour 
showed himself wiser than his gifted minister. As disappointed 
as the latter, he saw more clearly than did Cavour that though 
Piedmont had not gained all that she had hoped to, yet she had 
gained much. It was wiser to take what one could get and bide the 
future than to imperil all by some mad course. Here was one of 
the great moments where the independence and common sense of 
Victor Emmanuel were of great and enduring service to his country. 

EXPANSION OF PIEDMONT 

Napoleon had not done all that he had planned for Italy, yet he 

had rendered a very important service. He had secured Lombardy 

Piedmont for Piedmont. It should also be noted that he himself acknowl- 

acquires edged that the failure to carry out the whole program had 

cm ar y canceled any claim he had upon the annexation of Savoy and 

Nice to France. 

But the future of Italy was not to be determined solely by the Em- 



-^■< 



44 



^P5»!^^ S W I T Z E-R X. AK 



c fGothardPass '** J.ongtliuie £ast liO-om 



hu-i'a \ \ ptl£^i'*^5%;/o/,. 



/ 



Grvtmle V \-^~^r 






,-^ 









pH^/L, 



tiii 



^.. 



o 



^fi'ir//" o/" 



Gen 



oa 




(Panh 



vTu scan V/^x 

Sicna • 1 M . 

Corhna'i, - 






Orbelei 




-^/ «^/i7| 









MAP TO ILLUSTRATE 
THE UNIFICATION OF 

ITAL,^ 



Scale of English Miles 
p gg 60 60 so too 

REFERENCE 

I TT 1 ,4n/uiriUien t^Sardinm', roM bi/ 
^ ^ PimscUes,^(ar. Jl.kl2, 1860. ' 

:j I TTT I Ann^atiofi to Sardinia, voted by 
^^^^^PiaiscUes.Mv.4,&5,186a 

I TTT I AnneouUim ti> Sardinia, voted by 
LJJ^ PlJbiscHes, Oct. 21^.1. IS60 

\ y \r 1 :4nnp,w/i/)n toKintjd^m orjtnly 
** l-i— ' V"tedhyPli>l>iscites, Oct 2i,i:2?, 1366. 

i l -tTT I dnncmtion to Kinodom ofJtatr, 
» l-J^^ Voted by Plfbiscite, Oct. 2.ma ' 

P^dTI Ceded toFrance,Mmdt, 1860. 
fvBH Ceded to Frame, March J'^^O. 




*^a/UeU/i 



nwMi 14 



'r'est ^> /-s 



'^Mmi 




^ 



M P 



R 



"TBosna^enai 



/'■ 






«r «> 













<5^ 



Barl 



Cottars' 
Budiid 



^ DiiraT.zoi 




^laiaroM 



Sriruiisi 



ja^iilb. 






^A^ 



oCaktwvUJ/iri 



1"^ 
Msffiza 



)Ai'lonaf 



\Otranfo 



^*^ -^J.?**/ 




ANNEXATIONS TO PIEDMONT 429 

peror of France and the Emperor of Austria. The people of Italy 
had their own ideas and were resolved to make them heard. Du4-ing 
the war, so suddenly and unexpectedly closed, the rulers of Modena, 
Parma, Tuscany had been overthrown by popular uprisings and the 
Pope's authority in Romagna (ro-man'-ya), the northern part ^^^^ . , . 
of his dominions, had been destroyed. The people who had after 
accomplished this had no intention of restoring the princes ^ "^^""^^ 
they had expelled. They defied the two Emperors who had decided 
at Villafranca that those rulers should be restored. In this they 
were supported diplomatically by the English Government. This 
was England's great service to the Italians. "The people of tht 
duchies have as much right to change their sovereigns," said Lord 
Palmerston, "as the English people, or the French, or the Belgian, 
or the Swedish. The annexation of the duchies to Piedmont . ,. , 

Annexation of 

will be an unfathomable good to Italy." The people of these the duchies 
states voted almost unanimously in favor of annexation *° '® "^"^ 
(March 11-12, i860). Victor Emmanuel accepted the sovereignty 
thus offered him, and on April 2, 1S60, the first parliament of the 
enlarged kingdom met in Turin. A small state of less than 5,000,000 
had g'rown to one of 11,000,000 within a year. This was the most 
important change in the political system of Europe since 1815. 
As far as Italy was concerned it made waste paper of the treaties 
of 1815. It constituted the most damaging breach made thus far 
in the work of the Congress of Vienna. What that congress had 
decided was to be a mere "geographical expression" was now a 
nation in formation. And this was being accomplished by the 
triumphant assertion of two principles utterly odious to the monarchs 
of 1 815, the right of revolution and the right of peoples to determine 
their own destinies for themselves, for these annexations were the 
result of war and of plebiscites. 

Napoleon III acquiesced in all this, taking for himself Cession of 
Savoy and Nice in return for services rendered. The Peace N^ce^to^" 
of Villafranca was never enforced. France 



THE CONQUEST OF THE KINGDOM OF NAPLES 

Much had been achieved in the eventful year just described, but 
much remained to be achieved before the unification of Italy should be 
complete. Venetia, the larger part of the Papal States, and the King- 



430 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

dom of Naples still stood outside. In the last, however, events now 
occurred which carried the process a long step forward. Early in 1 860 
The sicUian the Sicilians rose in revolt against the despotism of their 
insurrection j^ew king, Francis II. This insurrection created an oppor- 
tunity for a man already famous but destined to an amazing achieve- 
ment and to a memorable service to his country, Giuseppe Garibaldi, 
already the most popular military leader in Italy, and invested with a 
half mythical character of invincibility and daring, the result of a 
very spectacular, romantic career. 

Garibaldi was born at Nice in 1807. He was therefore two years 
younger than Mazzini and three years older than Cavour. Destined 
Garibaldi by his parents for the priesthood he preferred the sea, and for 
(1807-1882) many years he lived a roving and adventurous sailor's life. He 
early joined "Young Italy." His military experience was chiefly 
in irregular, guerrilla fighting. He took part in the unsuccessful 
insurrection organized by Mazzini in Savoy in 1834, and as a result 
was condemned to death. He managed to escape to South America 
where, for the next fourteen years, he was an exile. He participated 
in the abundant wars of the South American states with the famous 
"Italian Legion," which he organized and commanded. Learning 
of the uprising of 1848 he returned to Italy, though still under the 
The defense penalty of death, and immediately thousands flocked to the 
of Rome standard of the "hero of Montevideo" to fight under him 

against the Austrians. After the failure of that campaign he went, 
in 1849, to Rome to assume the military defense of the republic. 
When the city was about to fall he escaped with four thousand troops, 
intending to attack the Austrian power in Venetia. French and 
Austrian armies pursued him. He succeeded in evading them, but 
his army dwindled away rapidly and the chase became so hot that 
he was forced to escape to the Adriatic. When he landed later, his 
enemies were immediately in full cry again, hunting him through 
forests and over mountains as if he were some dangerous game. 
It was a wonderful exploit, rendered tragic by the death in a farm- 
house near Ravenna, of his wife Anita, who was his companion in 
. the camp as in the home, and who was as high-spirited, as daring, 
as courageous as he. Garibaldi finally escaped to America and 
began once more the life of an exile. But his story, shot through 
and through with heroism and chivalry and romance, moved the 
Italian people to unwonted depths of enthusiasm and admiration. 



THE CONQUEST OF THE KINGDOM OF NAPLES 431 



GARIBALDI'S EXPEDITION TO SICILY 

'' For several years Garibaldi was a wanderer, sailing the seas, com- 
mander of a Peruvian bark. For some months, indeed, he was a 
candle maker on Staten Island, but in 1854 he returned to 

T^ , , ^ Leader of 

Italy and set- -The Hunt- 
tied down as a ^" ^{^^^ 
farmer on the 
little island of Ca- 
prera. But the 
events of 1859 once 
more brought him 
(out of his retirement. 
Again, as a leader 
of volunteers, he 
plunged into the war 
against Austria and 
immensely increased 
his reputation. He 
had become the idol 
of soldiers and adven- 
turous spirits from 
one end of Italy 
to the other. Mul- 
titudes were ready to 
follow in blind con- 
fidence wherever he 
might lead. His 
name was one 
to conjure with. 
There now oc- 
curred, in i860, the 
most brilliant episode 
of his career, the Si- 
cilian expedition and 
the campaign against the Kingdom of Naples. For Garibaldi, the 
most redoubtable warrior of Italy, whose very name was worth an 
army, now decided on his own account to go to the aid of the Sici- 
lians who had risen in revolt against their king, Francis II of Naples. 




Determines 
to go to 
Sicily 



(Jariealdi 
From a photograph. 



432 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

On May 5, i860, the expedition of "The Thousand," the "Red 
Shirts," embarked from Genoa in two steamers. These were the 
volunteers, nearly 1,150 men, whom Garibaldi's fame had 
dUion^o^^ caused to rush into the new adventure, an adventure that 
" The ^^ seemed at the moment one of utter folly. The King of Naples 
had 24,000 troops in Sicily and 100,000 more on the mainland. 
The odds against success seemed overwhelming. But fortune 
favored the brave. After a campaign of a few weeks, in which he was 
several times in great danger, and was only saved by the most reck- 
less fighting. Garibaldi stood master of the island, helped by the 
Sicilian insurgents, by volunteers who had flocked from the mainland, 
and by the incompetency of the commanders of the Neapolitan 
troops. Audacity had won the victory. He assumed the position 
of Dictator in Sicily in the name of Victor Emmanuel II (August 5, 
i860). 

Garibaldi now crossed the straits to the mainland determined 

to conquer the entire Kingdom of Naples (August 19, i860). The 

King still had an army of 100,000 men, but it had not even the 

Conquest of * ., , ^, . n 11,11 

the Kingdom strength of a frail reed. There was practically no bloodshed. 

of Naples r^Y^e Neapolitan Kingdom was not overthrown ; it collapsed. 
Treachery, desertion, corruption did the work. On September 6, 
Francis II left Naples for Gaeta (ga-a'-ta) and the next day Garibaldi 
entered it by rail with only a few attendants, and drove through the 
streets amid a pandemonium of enthusiasm. In less than five 
months he had conquered a kingdom of 1 1,000,000 people, an achieve- 
ment unique in modern history. 

Garibaldi now began to talk of pushing on to Rome. To Cavour 

the situation seemed full of danger. Rome was occupied by a 

French garrison. An attack upon it would almost necessarily 

Garibaldi ° ^ ^ i r i ■ i j >. 

plans to mean an attack upon France. Cavour therefore decided to 

attack Rome intervene, to take the direction of events out of the hands of 
Garibaldi, and to guide the future evolution himself. At his instance, 
therefore, Victor Emmanuel led an army into the Papal States. 
But he did not lead it to Rome as he knew that Napoleon III, 
because of the strong Catholic feeling in France, would not permit 
him to annex the Papal capital. Napoleon, however, was willing 
that he should annex the Marches (march'-ez) and Umbria, which 
were parts of the Pope's possessions. Only the city of Rome and the 
country round about it must not be touched. 



INVASION OF THE PAPAL STATES 



433 



VICTOR EMMANUEL PROCLAIMED KING OF ITALY 

Victor Emmanuel's army defeated the Papal troops at Castelfi- 
dardo (September i8, i860). It then entered the territory of Naples. 
On November 7, Victor Emmanuel and Garibaldi drove intervention 
together through the streets of Naples. The latter refused °^ Piedmont 

all rewards and honors 
and with only a little 
money and a bag of 
seed beans for the spring 
planting sailed away to 
his farm on the island of 
Caprera. 

Victor Emmanuel com- 
pleted the conquest which 
Garibaldi had alone xhe annexa- 
carried so far. The t'o» °* 

Naples, Um- 
people m the bria, and the 

Marches, Umbria, Marches 
and the Kingdom of 
Naples voted overwhelm- 
ingly in favor of annexa- 
tion to the new Kingdom 
of Italy, which had been 
created in this astonish- 
ing fashion. 

On the 1 8 th of Febru- 
ary, 1 86 1, a new Parlia- 
ment, representing The King- 
all Italy except Ve- dom of itaiy 
netia and Rome, ^'''''^"^^'' 
met in Turin. The King- 
dom of Sardinia now gave 
way to the Kingdom of Italy, proclaimed on March 17. Victor 
Emmanuel II was declared "by the grace of God and the will of 
the nation. King of Italy." 

A new kingdom, comprising a population of about twenty-two 
millions, had arisen during a period of eighteen months, and now took 
its place among the powers of Europe. But the Kingdom of Italy was 




Victor Emmanuel II 
From the engraving by Metzmacher. 



434 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY 

still incomplete. Venetia was still Austrian and Rome was still 
subject to the Pope. The acquisition of these had to be postponed. 

Nevertheless, Cavour felt that "without Rome there was no 

Italy." He was working on a scheme which he hoped might reconcile 

the Pope and the Catholic world everywhere to the recognition of 

Rome as the capital of the new kingdom, when he suddenly fell ill. 

Overwork, the extraordinary pressure under which he had for 

months been laboring, brought on insomnia ; finally fever 

Cavour" developed and he died on the morning of June 6, 1861, in 

the very prime of life, for he was only fifty-one years of age. 

"Cavour," said Lord Palmerston, in the British House of Com- 
mons, "left a name 'to point a moral and adorn a tale.-' The moral 
was, that a man of transcendent talent, indomitable industry, in- 
extinguishable patriotism, could overcome difficulties which seemed 
insurmountable,! and confer the greatest, the most inestimable 
benefits on his country. The tale with which his memory would be 
associated was the most extraordinary, the most romantic, in the 
annals of the world. A people which had seemed dead had arisen to 
new and vigorous life, breaking the spell which bound it, and showing 
itself worthy of a new and splendid destiny." 

Throughout his life Cavour remained faithful to his fundamental 
political principle, government by parliament and by constitutional 
forms. Urged at various times to assume a dictatorship he replied 
that he had no confidence in dictatorships. ' ' I always feel strongest, ' ' 
he said, "when Parliament is sitting." "I cannot betray my origin, 
deny the principles of all my life," he wrote in a private letter not 
intended for the public. "I am the son of liberty and to her I owe 
all that I am. If a veil is to be placed on her statue, it is not for me 
to do it." 

REFERENCES 

Mazzini and Young Italy : Holland, Builders of United Italy, pp. 125-164; 
Marriott, Makers of Modern Italy; Thayer, Dawn of Italian Independence, Vol. 
I, pp. 379-403; Bolton King, Joseph Mazzini; Thayer, Italica. 

Cavour: Holland, pp. 165-222; Marnott, Makers of Modern Italy; Ce- 
saresco, Cavour; Thayer, Cavour. 

Garibaldi: Holland, pp. 223-282; Marriott, Makers of Modern Italy; 
Trevelyan, Garibaldi's Defence of the Roman Republic, pp. 7-41 ; Murdock, 
Reconstruction of Modern Europe, pp. 156-177; Cesaresco, Liberation of Italy, 
pp. 266-339 j Trevelyan, Garibaldi and the Thousand. 



CHAPTER XXI 

THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY 

In 1848 and 1849 the liberal elements of Germany had made an 
earnest effort to achieve national unity but the work of the Parliament 
of Frankfort had been rejected by the sovereigns of the leadins, „ . . 

, -^ ^ ^ Reaction in 

States and had been rendered null and void. The old Confed- Germany 
eration was restored, resuming its sessions in May, 1851. A ^^^^"^ ^^49 
period of reaction in Germany began again, even more far-reaching in 
its scope than that which had followed the Congress of Vienna in 1 8 1 5. 
Austria and Prussia took the lead in the familiar work of oppression. 
One gain had been made in the turbulent year. The King of 
Prussia had granted a constitution and created a Parliament. Like 
the King of Piedmont he refused to abolish the constitution. „ 

Prussia 

Unlike the latter, however, he did not at all intend that the given a 
creation of a parliament should mean the introduction of <='"*^*'*"*'*'" 
the English parliamentary system, with parliament, representing the 
people, the dominant authority in the state. The constitutional de- 
velopment of Piedmont and Prussia, starting at the same time, was to 
be utterly different. In passing from Italy to Germany we enter 
another atmosphere. In Piedmont, as we hav^ seen, the constitution 
was honestly and vigorously applied and yielded its legitimate fruit in 
the political education of the people. Cavour believed that the free 
discussion of parliament was a safer and wiser guide than the auto- 
cratic determination of a monarch. Liberty was his ideal „ 

•^ Prussia not 

from which he never swerved, though it would often have a pariiamen- 
been convenient for him if he had. On the other hand, the '^"^^ ^ * ^ 
King of Prussia did not propose to divide his power with any as- 
sembly. The assembly had no control over the ministry. 

DEADLOCK BETWEEN WILLIAM I AND PARLIAMENT 

While Prussia preserved her constitution the ministers developed 
great skill in really nullifying it, though pretending to maintain it. 
The government of Prussia was, after 1848 as before, a scarcely 

435 



436 



THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY 



veiled autocracy. Reaction of the old, classic style was the order 
of the day. The press was not free. Public meetings might be held 
only by those favorable to the government. The police were active 
and unscrupulous. 

A change came over Prussia, though not in the direction of free 
institutions and the development of a free public life, with the begin- 
ning of a reign, destined 
to prove most illustrious, 
that of William I. 

William became King 
of Prussia in 1861. He 

WiUiamI WaS the SOU of 

(1797-1888) ^he famous Queen 

Louise, was born in 1 797, 

and had served in the 

campaign against Na- 
poleon in 1814. He was 

now sixty-four years old. 

His mind was in no sense 

brilliant but was slow, 

solid, and sound. His 

entire lifetime had been 

spent in the army, which 

he loved passionately. 

In military matters his 

thorough knowledge and 

competence were recog- 
nized. He believed that 

Prussia's destinies were 

dependent upon her 

army. The army was 

necessary for his purpose, which was to put Prussia at the head of 

Germany. "Whoever wishes to rule Germany must conquer it," he 

wrote in 1849, "and that cannot be done by phrases." 

William believed that the Prussian army needed strengthening, 

and he brought forward a plan that would nearly double it. He de- 
Army reform n^^^ded the necessary appropriations of Parliament, which 
declined to grant them, A bitter and prolonged controversy 

arose between the Crown and the Chamber of Deputies, each side 




WlLLI.^M I 
From a photograph taken in 1S70. 



BISMARCK 437 

growing stiffer as the contest proceeded. The King was absolutely 
resolved not to abate one jot or tittle from his demands. On the 
other hand, the Chamber persisted in asserting its control over the 
purse, as the fundamental power of any parliament that ^ osition 
intends to count for anything in the state. A deadlock of the 
ensued. The King was urged to abolish Parliament altogether. ^^ ^'^ 
This he would not do because he had sworn to support the constitu- 
tion which established it. He thought of abdicating. He never, 
thought of abandoning the reform. He had written out his abdica- 
tion and signed it, and it was lying upon his desk when he at last 
consented to call to the ministry as a final experiment a new 
man, known for his boldness, his independence, his devotion to sismarck- 

the monarchv, Otto von Bismarck. Bismarck was appointed Schonhausen 

(1815-1898) 
President of the Ministry September 23, 1862 ; on that very 

day the Chamber rejected anew the credits asked for by the King 
for the new regiments. The conflict entered upon its most acute 
phase and a new era began for Prussia and for the world. 

In this interview Bismarck told the King frankly that he was willing 
to carry out his policy whether Parliament agreed to it or not. "I 
will rather perish with the King," he said, " than forsake your Majesty 
in the contest with parliamentary government." His boldness deter- 
mined the King to tear up the paper containing his abdication and to 
continue the struggle with the Chamber of Deputies. 



BISMARCK'S PREVIOUS CAREER 

The man who now entered upon the stage of European politics was 
one of the most original and remarkable characters of his century. 
Born in 181 5, he came of a noble family in Brandenburg and ^-^^^^ ^, 
was an aristocrat to his finger tips. Receiving a university previous 
education, he entered the civil service of Prussia, only to '^^'^^'^ 
leave it shortly, disgusted by its monotony. He then settled upon 
his father's estate as a country squire. Unlike Cavour in Italy, 
Bismarck was enraged when the King granted a constitution to 
Prussia in 1850. While Cavour saw in England the model of what 
he wished his own countrv to become, Bismarck said, "The _. ,, 

oismarcK s 

references to England are our misfortune." Bismarck's politi- political 
cal ideas centered in his ardent belief in the Prussian mon- "p""*"^^ 
archy. It had been the Prussian kings, not the Prussian people, 



438 



THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY 



who had made Prussia great. This, the great historic fact, must be 
preserved. What Prussian kings had done, they still would do. A 
reduction of royal power would only be damaging to the state. Bis- 
marck was the uncompromising foe of the attempts made in 1 848 to 
achieve German unity, because he thought that it should be the 
princes and not the people who should determine the institutions 
and destinies of Germany. 
He hated democracy as 
he hated parliaments and 

His hatred Constitutions. "I 

of democracy jook for Prussian 
honor in Prussia's absti- 
nence before all things 
from every shameful union 
with democracy," he said. 
In 1 85 1 Bismarck was ap- 
pointed Prussian delegate 
to the Diet in Frankfort, 
where for the next eight 
years he studied and prac- 
ticed the art of diplomacy, 
in which he was later to 
win many sweeping vic- 
tories. He made the ac- 
quaintance of all the 
important statesmen and 
politicians of Germany 
and studied their charac- 
ters and ambitions. He 
became strongly anti- 
Austrian in his senti- 
ments. As early as 1853 he told his government that there was 
not room in Germany for both Prussia and Austria, that one or 
the other must bend. His utterances and attitudes became more 
and more irritating to Austria. Consequently King William, wish- 
ing to continue on good relations with the latter power, appointed 
him in 1859 ambassador to St. Petersburg, or, as Bismarck put it, 
sent him "to cool off on the banks of the Neva." Later he was, 
for a short time, ambassador to France. 




Bismarck 
From a photograph. 



BISMARCK'S BLOOD AND IRON POLICY 439 

Such was the man, who, in 1862 at the age of forty-seven, accepted 
the position of President of the Prussian Ministry at a time when King 
and Parliament confronted each other in angry deadlock, and when no 
other politician would accept the leadership. For four years, from 
1862 to 1866, the conflict continued. The constitution was not 
abolished. Parliament was called repeatedly, the Lower House The period 
voted year after year against the budget, supported in this by °^ conflict 
the voters, the Upper House voted for it, and the King acted as if this 
made it legal. The period was one of virtual dictatorship and real 
suspension of parliamentary life. The King continued to collect the 
taxes, the army was thoroughly reorganized and absolutely controlled 
by the authorities, and the Lower House had no mode of opposition 
save the verbal one, which was entirely ineffective. 

Thus the increase in the army was secured. But an army is a mere 
means to an end. The particular end that Bismarck had in view was 
the creation of German unity by means of Prussia and for Army 
the advantage of Prussia. There must be no absorption of carried 
Prussia in Germany, as there had been of Piedmont in Italy, through 
Piedmont as a separate state entirely disappearing. And in Bis- 
marck's opinion this unity could only be achieved by war. 

He boldly denied in Parliament the favorite theory of the Liberals, 
that Prussia was to be made great by a liberal, free, parliamentary 
government, by setting an example of progressiveness, as Piedmont 
had done, which would rally Germans in other states about her, 
rather than about their own governments. In what was destined 
to be the most famous speech of his life he declared in 1 863 that what 
Germans cared about was not the liberalism of Prussia but her power. 
Prussia must concentrate her forces and hold herself ready for the 
favorable moment. "Not by speeches and majority votes are the 
great questions of the day decided — that was the great blunder 
of 1848 and 1849 — but by blood and iron," in other words the army, 
not Parliament, would determine the future of Prussia. 

This "blood and iron" policy was bitterly denounced by Liberals, 
but Bismarck ignored their criticisms and shortly found a ■• Blood and 
chance to begin its application. "^"'^ " P°'**=y 

The German Empire was the result of the policy of blood and iron as 
carried out by Prussia in three wars which were crowded into Prussia's 
the brief period of six years, the war with Denmark in 1864, three wars 
with Austria in 1866, and with France in 1870, the last two of 



440 THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY 

which were largely the result of Bismarck's will and his diplomatic 
ingenuity and unscrupulousness, and the first of which he exploited 
consummately for the advantage of Prussia. 



THE SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN QUESTION 

The first of these grew out of one of the most complicated ques- 
tions that have ever perplexed diplomatists and statesmen, the future 
of Schleswig (shlaz-vig) and Holstein. These were two duchies in 
the Danish peninsula, which is itself simply an extension of the great 
plain of northern Germany. Holstein was inhabited by a population 
of about 600,000, entirely German ; Schleswig by a population of 
from 250,000 to 300,000 Germans and 150000 Danes. These two 
duchies had for centuries been united with Denmark, but they did 
not form an integral part of the Danish Kingdom. Their relation 
to Denmark was personal, arising from the fact that a Duke of 
Schleswig and Holstein had become King of Denmark, just as an 
Elector of Hanover had become a King of England. Holstein was a 
member of the German Confederation, but Schleswig was not. 
The Germans in Schleswig wished to bring about its admission to 
the Confederation but the Danes objected and in 1863 declared 
Schleswig incorporated in Denmark. 

There are other elements in the tangle which it is unnecessary to 

explain as the question of Schleswig and Holstein was not decided at 

all on its merits, was not decided as either the Danish or the German 

people wished it to be. Bismarck saw in the situation a chance for a 

possible aggrandizement of Prussia and a chance for a quarrel with 

Austria, both things which he desired for the greater glory of his 

country. He induced Austria to cooperate with Prussia in settling 

the Schleswig-Holstein question. The two powers delivered an 

ultimatum to Denmark allowing that country only forty-eight 

Austria make hours in which to Comply with their demands. The Danes 

war on j^qI- complying, Prussia and Austria immediately declared war. 

Denmark « , ,, 111 

A war between one small state and two large ones could not be 
doubtful. Sixty thousand Prussians and Austrians invaded Den- 
mark in February, 1864, and though their campaign was not brilliant, 
they easily won, and forced Denmark to cede the two duchies to 
them jointly (October, 1864). They might make whatever dis- 
position of them they chose to. 



THE SEVEN WEEKS' WAR 441 

But they could not agree. Austria wished them admitted together 
as an additional state of the German Confederation and the people of 
Germany were overwhelmingly in favor of this arrangement. 
But Bismarck's ideas were very different. He did not care between 
for another German state. There were too many already, Prussia and 

. Austria 

and this one would only be another enemy of Prussia and 
ally of Austria. Moreover, Bismarck wished to annex the duchies 
wholly or in part to Prussia. He desired aggrandizement in general, 
but this particular addition would be especially advantageous, as it 
would lengthen the coast line of Prussia, would bring with it several 
good harbors, notably Kiel, and would enable Prussia to expand com- 
mercially. 

Thus the two powers were at variance over the disposition of their 
spoils. The situation was one that exactly suited Bismarck. Out 
of it he hoped to bring about the war with Austria which he had 
desired for the past ten years as being the only means whereby 
German unity could be achieved by Prussia and for Prussia's advan- 
tage. There was not room enough in Germany, he thought, for 
both powers. That being the case, he wished the room for Prussia. 
The only way to get it was to take it. As Austria had no inclination 
gracefully to yield, there would have to be a fight. Both began to 
arm 

THE AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR OF 1866 

Finally war broke out in June, 1866. Bismarck had thus brought 
about his dream of a conflict between people of the same race to 
determine the question of control. It proved to be one of the 
shortest wars in history, one of the most decisive, and one whose 
consequences were most momentous. It is called the Seven Weeks' 
War. It began June 16, 1866, was virtually decided on July 3, 
was brought to a close before the end of that month by the pre- 
liminary Peace of Nikolsburg, July 26, which was followed a month 
later by the definitive Peace of Prague, August 23. Prussia had no 
German allies of any importance. Several of the North German 
states sided with her, but these were small and their armies were 
unimportant. On the other hand, Austria was supported by the 
four kingdoms, Bavaria, Wurtemberg, Saxony, and Hanover ; also 
by Hesse-Cassel, Hesse-Darmstadt, Nassau, and Baden. But 
Prussia had one important ally, Italy, without whose aid she might 



442 



THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY 



Prussia 
conquers 
North 
Germany 



not have won the victory. Italy was to receive Venetia, which she 
coveted, if Austria were defeated. The Prussian army, however, 
was better prepared. For years the rulers of Prussia had been 
preparing for war, perfecting the army down to the minutest detail, 
and with scientific thoroughness, and when the war began it was 
absolutely ready. More- 
over, it was directed by a 
very able leader, General 
von Moltke. 

Prussia had many ene- 
mies. Being absolutely 

prepared, as her 

enemies were not, 

she could assume 

the offensive, and 
this was the cause of her 
first victories. War be- 
gan June i6. Within 
three days Prussian troops 
had occupied Hanover, 
Dresden, and Cassel, the 
capitals of her three North 
German enemies. A few 
days later the Hanoverian 
army was forced to ca- 
pitulate. The King of 
Hanover and the Elector 
of Hesse were taken pris- 
oners of war. All North 
Germany was now con- 
trolled by Prussia, and 
within two weeks of the 
opening of the war she was ready to attempt the great plan of 

Moltke, an invasion of Bohemia. The rapiditj^ of the cam- 
of Kbnig- paign struck Europe with amazement. Moltke sent three 
gratz, or armies by different routes into Bohemia, and on July 3, 1866, 

one of the great battles of history, that of Koniggratz, or 
Sadowa, was fought. Each army numbered over 200,000, the 
Prussians outnumbering the Austrians, though not at the beginning. 















w ^ 








TiA 


.1 






kU 


. 1 * 




..^^^ 


7 x/ 






c 

m 






1 

( 


(^ 






I 


f 



]\IOLTKE 

From the painting by Lenbach. 



Sadowa 



PRUSSIAN ANNEXATIONS 443 

Since the battle of Leipsic in 18 13, so many troops had not been 
engaged in a single conflict. King William, Bismarck, and Moltke 
took up their position on a hill, whence they could view the scene. 
The battle was long and doubtful. Beginning early in the morning, 
it continued for hours, fought with terrific fury, the Prussians making 
no advance against the Austrian artillery. Up to two o'clock it 
seemed an Austrian victory, but with the arrival of the Prussian 
Crown Prince with his army the issue was turned, and at half-past 
three the Austrians were beaten and their retreat began. They had 
lost over forty thousand men, while the Prussian loss was about ten 
thousand. The Prussian army during the next three weeks advanced 
to within sight of the spires of Vienna. 

On June 24 the Austrians had been victorious over the Italians at 
Custozza. Yet the Italians had helped Prussia by detaining eighty 
thousand Austrian troops, which, had they been at Koniggratz, 
would probably have turned the day. The Italian fleet was also 
defeated by the Austrian at Lissa, July 20. 

RESULTS OF AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR 

The results of the Seven Weeks' War were momentous. Fearing 
the intervention of Europe, and particularly that of France, which 
was threatened, and which might rob the victory of its fruits, Bis- 
marck wished to make peace at once, and consequently offered 
lenient terms to Austria. She was to cede Venetia to Italy but was 
to lose no other territory. She was to withdraw from the German 
Confederation, which, indeed, was to cease to exist. She was to 
allow Prussia to organize and lead a new confederation, composed of 
those states which were north of the river Main. The South German 
states were left free to act as they chose. Thus Germany, north of 
the Main, was to be united. 

Having accomplished this, Prussia proceeded to make important 
annexations to her own territory. The Kingdom of Hanover, the 
Duchies of Nassau and Hesse-Cassel, and the free city of Frankfort, 
as well as the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein, were incorporated 
in the Prussian kingdom. Its population was thereby increased 
by over four and a half million new subjects, and thus was Annexations 
about twenty-four million. There was no thought of having *° Prussia 
the people of these states vote on the question of annexation, as 



444 THE UxNIFICATION OF GERMANY 

had been done in Italy, and in Savoy and Nice. They were annexed 
forthwith by right of mihtary conquest. Reigning houses ceased 
to rule on order from Berlin. Unwisely for themselves European 
nations allowed the swift consummation of these changes, which 
altered the balance of power and the map of Europe — a mistake 
which France in particular was to repent most bitterly. "I do not 
like this dethronement of dynasties," said the Czar, but he failed to 
express his dislike in action. 

The North German Confederation, which was now created, in- 
cluded all of Germany north of the river Main, twenty- two states 
in all. The constitution was the work of Bismarck. There 

The North , . , r i ^ r , • i i t^- 

German Con- was to be a president of the Confederation, namely the King 
usr-'is'^i) °^ Prussia. There was to be a Federal Council (Bundesrath), 
composed of delegates sent by the sovereigns of the different 
states, to be recalled at their pleasure, to vote as they dictated. 
Prussia was always to have seventeen votes out of the total forty- 
three. In order to have a majority she would have to gain only a 
few adherents from the other states, which she could easily do. 

There was also to be a Reichstag, elected by the people. This was 
Bismarck's concession to the Liberals. Of the two bodies the 
Reichstag was much the less important. The people were given a 
place in the new system, but a subordinate one. 

The new constitution went into force July i, 1867. This North 
German Confederation remained in existence only four years when 
it gave way to the German Empire, one of the results of the Franco- 
Prussian War of 1870. 

REFERENCES 

Bismarck's Early Life : Munroe Smith, Bismarck and German Unity, pp. 
1-18 ; Headlam, Bismarck and the Foundation of the German Empire, pp. 1-33. 

The Seven Weeks' War : Murdock, Reconstruction of Modern Europe, 
Chaps. XVI-XVIII, pp. 211-248; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 936- 
958; Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 393-410; Headlam, 
pp. 240-290; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 107-113. 

Establishment of the North German Confederation : Headlam, Chap. 
XII, pp. 291-314; Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, 
Vol. I, pp. 237-242 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1S14, pp. 472- 
481 ; Robertson, C. G., Bismarck, Chap. V. 



CHAPTER XXII 

THE SECOND EMPIRE AND THE FRANCO-PRUSSIAN 

WAR 

The year 1866 is a turning point in the history of Prussia, of Austria, 
of France, of modern Europe. It profoundly altered the historic bal- 
ance of power. By the decisiveness of the campaign, and by 
the momentous character of its consequences, Prussia, hitherto ^gL^^^'^ 
regarded as the least important of the great powers, had turning point 
astounded Europe by the evidence of her strength. She J^gtory^'^" 
possessed a remarkable army and a remarkable statesman. 
That both were the most powerful in Europe was not entirely proved, 
but the feeling was widespread that such was the case. The center of 
interest in central Europe shifted from Vienna to Berlin. The repu- 
tation of Napoleon III was seriously compromised. He had entirely 
misjudged the situation, had played a feeble and mistaken part, 
when he might have played one highly advantageous to his country. 
He had rather welcomed the war between Prussia and Austria. In 
his opinion, it would be long, exhausting both combatants. At the 
proper time he could intervene, and from the distress of the rivals . 
could extract gain for France, possibly the left bank of the Rhine, 
which Prussia might be willing to relinquish in return for aid. His 
calculation was based upon his belief in the vast military superiority 
of Austria. The war came, and, contrary to expectation, it was short 
and swift. . Prussia was victorious, not Austria. The battle of 
Koniggratz, or Sadowa, July 3, 1866, was decisive. Even 
then it was not too late for an intervention. Napoleon could Napoleon's 
have played a commanding part in determining the terms of hls"*^^ ^° "^* 
peace had he threatened to come to the aid of Austria, as opportunity 
Austria desired. Had he refused to recognize the annexations 
of Prussia unless compensated, he could have secured important 
additions to France. But his policy was weak and vacillating. 

445 



446 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR 




NAPOLEON'S ATTACK UPON MEXICO 447 

Accomplishing nothing for France, he yet irritated Prussia by a 
half-measure of insisting that the new confederation should not 
extend south of the river Main. 



NAPOLEON'S MEXICAN EXPEDITION 

Another serious mistake of Napoleon was culminating at this very 
time, his Mexican policy, a most unnecessary, reckless, and disastrous 
enterprise. This ill-starred adventure began in an intervention 
of France, England, and Spain, whose .citizens had loaned money 
to Mexico, the interest on which Mexico now refused to pay. A joint 
expedition was sent out in December, 1861, to compel the discharge 
of the financial obligations incurred by that country under treaty 
arrangements. But by April, 1862, it became clear to Spain and 
England that France had distinctly other purposes in this affair 
than those stated in the treaty of alliance. Napoleon's real inten- 
tions, shortly apparent, were the overthrow of the republic and the 
establishment of a monarchy in Mexico under a European prince. 
The English and Spaniards would give no sanction to such a scheme, 
and consequently entirely withdrew in April, 1862. The expedition 
now became one purely French. The question of financial honesty 
on the part of Mexico was lost sight of, and a war began, a war of 
aggression, entirely uncalled for, but a war which in the end punished 
its author more than it did the Mexicans, one of the most dishon- 
orable, as it was one of the most costly and disastrous, for the Second 
Empire. 

Napoleon was a man of ideas, a man of imagination. Unfortu- 
nately his ideas were frequently vast yet vague, his imagination 
frequently unsound, deceptive. He evidently dreamed of Napoleon's 
building up a Latin Empire in the New World, under his pro- purposes 
tection, a sort of bulwark and outpost of the Latin element, designed 
to hem in the overflowing Anglo-Saxon element. Thus his favorite 
theory of nationalities would win another victory ; also the colonies 
of Spain and France would be more secure, French commerce would 
find new outlets, the materials for French industries would be more 
easily procured. "And," said Napoleon, "we shall have established 
our beneficent influence in the center of America." 

Mexico wasa republic but there was a faction among the Mexicans 
which wished to overthrow it. This faction, under French inspiration 



448 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR 

and direction, held an assembly which decreed that Mexico should 

henceforth be an Empire and that the imperial crown should be 

offered to Archduke Maximilian of Austria, brother of Francis 

overthrows Joscph, the Emperor of Austria. This assembly represented, 

the Mexican perhaps, 350,000 pcoplc out of about 7,000,000. It offered 

Republic ^ \ .^^ „, . . ... 

a fatal gift. This young prince of thirty-one was of attractive 
and popular manners, and of liberal ideas. Young, handsome, 
versatile, half poet, half scientist, he was living in a superb palace, 
Miramar, overlooking the Adriatic, amid his collections, his ob- 
jects of art, and with the sea which was his passion always before 
him. From out of this enchanting retreat he now emerged to be- 
come the central figure of a short and frightful tragedy. Mexico 
lured him to his doom. Influenced by his own ambition and that 
of his spirited wife, Carlotta, daughter of Leopold I, King of 
Belgium, and receiving definite promises of French military sup- 
port until 1867, he accepted the imperial crown and arrived in 
Mexico in May, 1864. 

This entire project, born in the brain of Napoleon III, was to prove 
hopeless from the start, disastrous to all who participated in it, to the 

new Emperor and Empress, and to Napoleon. The difficulties 
outcome of Confronting the new monarch were insuperable. A guerrilla 
this ad- warfare was carried on successfully by Juarez, using up the 

French soldiers and putting them on the defensive. Even 
the communications of the French army with the sea were seriously 
threatened. Maximilian at last issued a decree that any enemies 
taken with arms would be summarily shot — a decree that made 
him hated by all Mexicans, and that gave to the war a character of 
extreme atrocity. A greater danger threatened the new empire when 

General Lee surrendered at Appomattox. The United States 
of the had looked from the first with disapprobation upon Napoleon's 

st^t^^ project. Now that the Civil War was over, she threatened 

intervention. Napoleon was unwilling to risk a conflict with 
this country, and consequently promised to withdraw his troops 
speedily from Mexico. Maximilian could not remain long an 
Emperor without Napoleon's support. His wife, Carlotta, returning 
to Europe to persuade Napoleon in frantic personal interviews not to 
desert them, received no promise of support from the man who had 
planned the whole adventure, and in the fearful agony of her con- 
templation of the impending doom of her husband became insane. 



BITTER ATTACKS UPON NAPOLEON III 449 

Maximilian was taken by the Mexicans and shot June 19, 1867. 
The phantom Empire vanished. 

A most expensive enterprise for the French Emperor. It had eaten 
into the financial resources of his country, already badly disorganized. 
It had prevented his playing a part in decisive events occurring in 
central Europe in 1864- 1866, in the Danish war, and the Austro- 
Prussian war, the outcome of which was to alter so seriously the im- 
portance of France in Europe by the exaltation of an ambitious. Discomfiture 
aggressive, and powerful military state, Prussia. It had of Napo- 
damaged him morally before Europe by the desertion of his ^°^ 
proteges to an appalling fate before the threats of the United States. 
He had squandered uselessly his military resources and had increased 
the national debt. It has been asserted that the INIexican war was 
as disastrous for Napoleon III as the Spanish war had been for 
Napoleon I. 

CONCESSIONS TO THE LIBERALS 

Feeling that his popularity was waning Napoleon decided to win 
over the Liberals, who had hitherto been his enemies, by granting in 
1868 certain reforms which they had constantly demanded, larger 
rights to the Legislative Chamber, greater freedom of the press, the 
right, under certain conditions, to hold public meetings. The 
Empire thus entered upon a frankly liberal path. The result was 
not to strengthen, but greatly to weaken it. Many new journals 
were founded, in which it was assailed with amazing bitterness. 
A remarkable freedom of speech characterized the last two years 
of Napoleon's reign. A movement to erect a monument to a republi- 
can deputy, Baudin, who had been shot on the barricades in 1851 
at the time of the coup d'etat, seemed to the Government to be 
too insulting. It prosecuted the men who were conducting the sub- 
scription. One of these was defended by a brilliant, impassioned 
young lawyer and orator from the south of France, thirty years of 
age, who was shortly to be a great figure in pohtics, a founder of the 
Third Republic. Gambetta conducted himself not as a lawyer 
defending his client, but as an avenger of the wrongs of France 
for the past seventeen years, impeaching bitterly the entire emergence 
reign of Napoleon III. Particularly did he dwell upon the q^^^° 
date of December 2. The coup d'etat, he said, was carried 
through by a crowd of unknown men "without talent, without honor, 



450 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR 

and hopelessly involved in debts and crimes." "These men pretend 
to have saved society. Do you save a country when you lay par- 
icidal hands upon it?" The end of this remarkable discourse 
remains famous: "Listen, you who for seventeen years have been 
absolute master of France. The thing that characterizes you best, 
because it is evidence of your own remorse, is the fact that you have 
never dared to say : ' We will place among the solemn festivals of 
France, we will celebrate as a national anniversary, the Second of 
December.' . . . Well! this anniversary we will take for ourselves ; 
we will observe it always, always without fail ; every year it shall be 
the anniversary of our dead, until the day when the country, having 
become master itself once more, shall impose upon you the great 
national expiation in the name of liberty, equality, and fraternity." 
This address had a prodigious effect. Nothing so defiant, so con- 
temptuous of the Government, had been heard in France since 1851. 
gjj^ Though Gambetta's client lost his case, it was generally felt 

attacks upon that the Empire emerged from that court-room soundly 
apoeon beaten. It was clear that there was a party in existence 
bent upon revenge, and willing to use all the privileges a now liberal 
Emperor might grant, not gratefully, but as a means of completely 
annihilating the very Empire, a Republican party, aggressive, and 
growing, already master of Paris, and organizing in the departments. 
Thus clouds were gathering, thicker and ever darker, around the 
throne of the Third Napoleon. There were domestic troubles, but, in 
the main, it was the foreign relations that inspired alarm and should 
have inspired caution. Over these years hung the German peril, the 
unmistakable challenge that lay in the astonishing success and the ag- 
gressive elation of Prussia. That was the sore point. The instinct of 
the French people saw in the battle of Koniggratz, or Sadowa, as they 
called it, a humiliating defeat for France, though it was a battle exclu- 
sively between Prussia and Austria, France being no party to the war. 
The instinct was largely right. At least the Peace of Prague involved 
and indicated the diminution of the authority and importance of 
France. For a reorganization so sweeping in central Europe as the 
overthrow of Austria, her expulsion from Germany, and the consoli- 
" Revenge dation and aggrandizement of Prussia, a powerful military 
for state, upset the balance of power. A feeling of alarm spread 

owa through France. "Revenge for Sadowa," was a cry often 

heard henceforth. Its meaning was that if one state like Prussia 



THE HOHENZOLLERX CANDIDACY 451 

should be increased in area and power, France also, for consenting 
to it, had a right to a proportionate increase, that the reciprocal 
relations might remain the same. 

From 1866 to 1870 the idea that ultimately a war would come 
between Prussia and France became familiar to the people and 
governments of both countries. Many Frenchmen desired "revenge 
for Sadowa." Prussians were proud and elated at their two suc- 
cessful wars, and intensely conscious of their new position in Europe. 
The newspapers of both countries during the next four years were 
full of crimination and recrimination, of abuse and taunt, the Gov- 
ernment in neither case greatly discouraging their unwise conduct, 
at times even inspiring and directing it. Such an atmosphere was 
an excellent one for ministers who wanted war to work in, and 
both France and Prussia had just such ministers. Bismarck gards^rwar" 
believed such a war inevitable, and, in his opinion, it was ^^*^ France 
desirable as the only way of completing the unification of Ger- 
many, since Napoleon would never willingly consent to the extension 
of the Confederation to include the South German states. All that 
he desired was that it should come at precisely the right moment, 
when Prussia was entirely ready, and that it should come by act of 
France, so that Prussia could pose before Europe as merely defending 
herself against a wanton aggressor. 

\\' ith responsible statesmen in such a temper it was not difficult to 
bring about a war. And yet the Franco-Prussian war broke most 
unexpectedly, like a thunderstorm, over Europe. Undreamed of 
July I, 1870, it began July 15. It came in a roundabout way. The 
Spanish throne was vacant, as a revolution had driven the monarch, 
Queen Isabella, out of that country. On July 2, news reached Paris 
that Leopold of Hohenzollern, a relative of the King of Prussia, had 
accepted the Spanish crown. Bismarck was behind this Hohen- 
zollern candidacy, zealously furthering it, despite the fact ^j^^ Hohen- 
that he knew Napoleon's feeling of hostility to it. Great was zoUern 
the indignation of the French papers and Parliament and a '^^^ ' ^^^ 
most dangerous crisis developed rapidly. Other powers intervened, 
laboring in the interests of peace. On July 12, it was announced that 
the Hohenzollern candidacy was withdrawn. 



452 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR 

FRANCE DECLARES WAR AGAINST PRUSSIA 

The tension was immediately relieved ; the war scare was over. 
Two men, however, were not pleased by this outcome, Bismarck, 
whose intrigue was now foiled and whose humiliation was so great 
that he thought he must resign and retire into private life, and Gra- 
mont, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, a reckless, blustering 
politician who was not satisfied with the diplomatic victory he had 
won but wished to win another which would increase the discomfiture 
of Prussia. The French ministry now made an additional demand 
that the King of Prussia should promise that this HohenzoUern can- 
didacy should never be renewed. The King declined to do so and 
The Ems authorized Bismarck to publish an account of the incident, 
despatch Here was Bismarck's opportunity which he used ruthlessly 

and joyously to provoke the French to declare war. His account, 
as he himself says, was intended to be " a red flag for the Gallic bull." 
The effect of its publication was instantaneous. It aroused the 
indignation of both countries to fever heat. The Prussians thought 
that their King, the French that their ambassador had been insulted. 
As if this were not sufficient the newspapers of both countries teemed 
with false, abusive, and inflammatory accounts. The voice of the 
advocates of peace was drowned in the general clamor. The head 
of the French ministry declared that he accepted this war "with a 
light heart." This war declared by France on July 15 grew 
The Franco- directly out of mere diplomatic fencing. The French people 
War of 1870 did not desire it, only the people of Paris, inflamed by an 
official press. Indeed, until it was declared, the French 
people hardly knew of the matter of dispute. It came upon them 
unexpectedly. The war was made by the responsible heads of two 
Governments. It was in its origin in no sense national in either 
country. Its immediate occasion was trivial. But it was the cause 
of a remarkable display of patriotism in both countries. 

The war upon which the French ministry entered with so light a 

heart was destined to prove the most disastrous in the history of their 

South Ger- Country. In every respect it was begun under singularly 

man states inauspicious circumstances. France declared war upon Prus- 

join russia ^j^ alone, but in a manner that threw the South German states, 

upon whose support she had counted, directly into the camp of 

Bismarck. They regarded the French demand, that the King of 



FALL OF THE SECOxND EMPIRE 453 

Prussia should pledge himself for all time to forbid the Prince of 
Hohenzollern's candidature, as unnecessary and insulting. At once 
Bavaria and Baden and Wiirtemberg joined the campaign on the side 
of Prussia. 

The French military authorities made the serious mistake of grossly 
underestimating the difficulty of the task before them. Incredible 
lack of preparation was revealed at once. The French army was 
poorly equipped, and was far inferior in numbers and in the ability 
of its commanders to the Prussian army. With the exception jh g m n 
of a few ineffectual successes the war was a long series of re- invade 
verses for the French. The Germans crossed the Rhine into '^*°*^^ 
Alsace and Lorraine, and succeeded, after several days of very heavy 
fighting, in shutting up Bazaine, with the principal French army, in 
Metz, a strong fortress which the Germans then besieged. 

THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE . 

On September i, another French army, with which was the Em- 
peror, was defeated at Sedan and was obliged on the following 
day to surrender to the Germans. Napoleon himself became a ofSedln* 
prisoner of war. The French lost, on these two days, in killed, 
wounded, or taken prisoners, nearly one hundred and twenty thou- 
sand men. 

Disasters so appalling resounded throughout the world. France no 
longer had an army ; one had capitulated at Sedan ; the other was 
locked up in Metz. The early defeats of' August had been an- 
nounced in Paris by the Government as victories. The deception 
could no longer be maintained. On September 3 this despatch was 
received from the Emperor: "The army has been defeated and is 
captive ; I myself am a prisoner." As a prisoner he was no longer 
head of the government of France ; there was, as Thiers said, a 
"vacancy of power." On Sunday, September 4, the Legislative 
Body was convened. But it had no time to deliberate. The mob 
invaded the hall shouting, "Down with the Empire ! Long live the 
Republic!" Gambetta, Jules Favre, and Jules Ferry, followed by 
the crowd, proceeded to the Hotel de Ville and there proclaimed the 
Republic. The Empress f^ed. A Government of National Defense 
was organized, with General Trochu at its head, which was the 
actual government of France during the rest of the war. 



454 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR 



The Franco-German war lasted about six months, from the first of 
August, 1870, when fighting began, to about the first of February, 
1 87 1. It falls naturally into two periods, the imperial and the 
republican. During the first, which was limited to the month of 
August, the regular armies were, as we have seen, destroyed or 
bottled up. Then the Empire collapsed and the Emperor was a 

prisoner in Germany. The 
second period lasted five 
months. France, under the 
Government of National De- 
fense, made a remarkably 
courageous and spirited de- 
fense under the most dis- 
couraging conditions. 

THE SIEGE OF PARIS 

The Germans, leaving a 
sufficient army to carry on the 
siege of Metz, advanced to- 
ward Paris. Then began the 
siege of that city on Septem- 
ber 19. This siege, one of the 
most famous in history, lasted 
four months, and astonished 
Europe. Immense stores had 
been collected in the city, the 
citizens were armed, and the 
defense was energetic. The 




Leon Gambetta 
From a photograph. 



Parisians hoped to hold out long enough to enable new armies 
to be organized and diplomacy possibly to intervene. To accom- 
plish the former a delegation from the Government of National 
Defense, headed by Gambetta, escaped from Paris by balloon, 
and established a branch seat of government first at Tours, then 
at Bordeaux. Gambetta, by his immense energy, his eloquence, 
his patriotism, was able to raise new armies, whose resistance aston- 
ished the Germans, but as they had not time to be thoroughly trained, 
they were unsuccessful. They could not break the immense circle of 
iron that surrounded Paris. After the overthrow of the Empire the 



THE SIEGE OF PARIS 455 

war was reduced to the siege of Paris, and the attempts of these im- 
provised armies to break that siege. These attempts were rendered all 
the more hopeless by the fall of Metz (October 27, 1870). Six thou- 
sand officers and 173,000 men were forced by impending starva- jhe fail of 
tion to surrender, with hundreds of cannon and immense war ^^^^ 
supplies, the greatest capitulation "recorded in the history of civil- 
ized nations." A month earlier, on September 27, Strasburg had 
surrendered and 19,000 soldiers had become prisoners of war. 

The capitulation of Metz was particularly disastrous' because it 
made possible the sending of more German armies to reenforce the 
siege of Paris, and to attack the forces which Gambetta was, by prodi- 
gies of effort, creating in the rest of France. These armies could not 
get to the relief of Paris, nor could the troops within Paris break 
through to them. The siege became simply a question of endurance. 

The Germans began the bombardment of the city early in January. 
Certain sections suffered terribly, and were ravaged by fires. Famine 
stared the Parisians in the face. After November 20 there was no 
more beef or lamb to be had ; after December 1 5 only thirty grams of 
horse meat a day per person, which, moreover, cost about xhe siege 
two dollars and a half a pound ; after January 15 the amount of °^ P^"s 
bread, a wretched stuff, was reduced to three hundred grams. People 
ate anything they could get, dogs, cats, rats. The market price for 
rats was two francs apiece. By the 31st of January, there would be 
nothing left to eat. Additional suffering arose from the fact that 
the winter was one of the coldest on record. Coal and firewood 
were exhausted. Trees in the Champs Elysees (shon' za-le-za') and 
the Bois de Boulogne (bua de bo-l6n') were cut down, and fires 
built in the public squares for the poor. Wine froze in casks. On 
January 28, with famine almost upon her, Paris capitulated after 
an heroic resistance. 



NOTABLE RESULTS OF THE WAR 

The terms of peace granted to Bismarck were extraordinarily 
severe. They were laid down in the Treaty of Frankfort, signed • 
May 10, 1 87 1. France was forced to cede Alsace and a large xhe Treaty 
part of Lorraine, including the important fortress of Metz. °^ Frankfort 
She must pay an absolutely unprecedented war indemnitj^ of five 
thousand million francs (a billion dollars) within three years. She 



456 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR 

was to support a German army of occupation, which should be 
gradually withdrawn as the installments of the indemnity were paid. 
The Treaty of Frankfort remained the open sore of Europe 
after 1 87 1 . France could never forget or forgive the deep humiliation 
of it. The enormous fine could, with the lapse of time, have been 
overlooked, but never the seizure of the two provinces by mere force 




The Proclamation of William I as German Emperor, Versailles, 

January 18, 1871 

From the painting by Anton von Werner. 

and against the unanimous and passionate protest of the people of 
Alsace and Lorraine. Moreover the eastern frontier of France was 
thus seriously weakened. 

Meanwhile other events had occurred as a result of this war. 
Fall of the Italy had completed her unification by seizing the city of Rome, 
temporal thus terminating the temporal rule of the Pope. The Pope had 

^°'"^^ been supported there by a French garrison. This was with- 

drawn as a result of the battle of Sedan, and the troops of Victor Em- 



THE GERMAN EMPIRE PROCLAIMED 457 

manuel attacked the Pope's own troops, defeated them after a shght 
resistance, and entered Rome on the 20th of September, _ , ^. 

' '^ ' Completion 

1870. The unity of Italy was now consummated and Rome of Italian 
became the capital of the kingdom. unification 

A more important consequence of the war was the completion of 
the unification of Germany, and the creation of the German Em- 
pire. Bismarck had desired a war with France as necessary _, . .^^ 
to bring about the unity of Germany. Whether necessary of German 
or not, at least that end was now secured. During the war " 
negotiations were carried on between Prussia and the South German 
states. Treaties were drawn up and the confederation was widened 
to include all the German states. On January 18, 1871, in the royal 
palace of Versailles, King William I was proclaimed German Emperor, 

The war of 1866 had resulted in the expulsion of Austria from Ger- 
many and from Italy. The war of 1870 completed the unification of 
both countries. Berlin became the capital of a federal Empire, 
Rome of a unified Kingdom. 

REFERENCES 

The Mexican Expedition : Forbes, Life of Napoleon the Third, Chap. XI, 
pp. 214-237; Andrews, Historical Development of Modern Europe, Vol. II, pp. 
I73~i77 ; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 968-971. 

The Liberal Empire: Fisher, Bonapartism, pp. 100-123; Lebon, Modern 
France, Chap. XIII, pp. 313-337; Forbes, Chap. XII, pp. 238-260; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 467-493. 

HoHENzoLLERN CANDIDACY AND THE Ems DESPATCH : Munroe Smith, 
Bismarck, pp. 49-57 ; Headlam, Bismarck, Chap. XIII, pp. 315-345 ; Fyffe, pp. 
978-984; Rose, Development of European Nations, Vol. I, pp. 45-57 ; Anderson, 
Constitutions and Documents, No. 121, pp. 593-594; Robinson and Beard, 
Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 158-159. 

The Franco-German War : Murdock, Reconstruction of Europe, Chaps. 
XXIV-XXX; Rose, Vol. I, Chaps. II and III, pp. 58-108; Fyffe, pp. 984- 
1019; Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 422-450; Wright, 
C. H. C, A History of the Third French Republic, Chaps. I and II, pp. 1-30; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. XXI, pp. 576-612. 

Proclamation of the German Empire : Rose, Vol. I, pp. 153-163 ; Robin- 
son and Beard, Vol. II, pp. 163-165. 



CHAPTER XXIII 
THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

CONSTITUTION OF THE NEW GERMAN EMPIRE 

The Franco-German war completed the unification of Germany. 
The Empire was proclaimed January i8, 1 871, in the old capital of the 
French monarchy. The constitution of the new state was adopted 
immediately after the close of the war and went into force April 16, 
.1871. In most respects it was simply the constitution of the North 
German Confederation of 1867. The name of Confederation gave 
way to that of Empire and the name of Emperor was substituted for 
that of President. But the Empire was a confederation, consisting of 
twenty-five states and one Imperial Territory, Alsace-Lorraine. 
"l^^ The King of Prussia was tpso facto German Emperor. The 

legislative power was vested in the Bundesrath, or Federal 
Council, and the Reichstag. The Emperor had the right to declare 
war with the consent of the Bundesrath, he was to be commander- 
in-chief of the army and navy, to have charge of foreign affairs and 
make treaties, subject to the limitation that certain kinds of treaties 
must be ratified by Parliament. He was to be assisted by a Chancel- 
lor, whom he was to appoint, and whom he might remove, who was 
not to be responsible to Parliament but to him alone. Under the 
Chancellor were various secretaries of state, who simply administered 
departments, but who did not form a cabinet responsible to Parlia- 
ment. 

Laws were to be made by the Bundesrath and the Reichstag. The 

Bundesrath was the most powerful body in the Empire. It possessed 

legislative, executive, and judicial functions and was a sort of 

Bundesrath, diplomatic assembly. It represented the states, that is, the 

or Federal rulers of the twenty-five states of which the Empire consisted. 

It was to be composed of delegates appointed by the rulers. 

Unlike the Senate of the United States, the states of Germany were 

not to be represented equally in the Bundesrath but most unequally. 

458 



THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF GERMANY 459 

There were to be fifty-eight members. Of these Prussia was to have 
seventeen, Bavaria six, Saxony and Wiirtemberg four each ; others 
three or two, and seventeen of the states were to have only one 
apiece. The Bundesrath was really the old Diet of Frankfort of 
1815, carried over into the new system, with certain changes 
rendered necessary by the intervening history. The members were 
to be really diplomats, representing the numerous sovereigns of Ger- 
many. They were not to vote individually but each state was to 
vote as a unit and as the ruler might instruct. Thus the seven- 
teen votes of Prussia were to be cast always as a unit, on one 
side or the other, and as the King of Prussia should direct. The The Bundes- 
Bundesrath was not to be a deliberative body because its mem- i^^^ "^"^ ? 

-^ dehberative 

bers were to vote accordmg to mstructions from the home gov- body 
emments. I ts members were not to be free to vote as they might 
see fit. It was in reality an assembly of the sovereigns of Germany. 
Its powers were very extensive. It was the most important element 
of the legislature as most legislation began in it, its consent was 
necessary to all legislation, and every law passed by the Reichstag 
must after that be submitted to it for ratification or rejection. It 
was therefore the chief source of legislation. Representing the 
princes of Germany, it was a thoroughly monarchical institution, a 
bulwark of the monarchical spirit. As a matter of fact it has 
generally been controlled by Prussia, although there have been a 
few cases since 1871 in which the will of Prussia has been overridden. 
Its proceedings were secret. 

The Reichstag was the only popular element in the Empire. It 
consisted of 397 members, elected for a term of five years by the 
voters, that is, by men twenty-five years of age or older. The xhe 
powers of the Reichstag were inferior to those of most of the Reichstag 
other popular chambers of Europe. It neither made nor unmade 
ministries. While it, in conjunction with the Bundesrath, voted the 
appropriations, certain ones, notably those for the army, were voted 
for a period of years. Its consent was required for new taxes, whereas 
taxes previously levied continued to be collected without the consent 
of Parliament being secured -again. The matters on which Parlia- 
ment might legislate were those concerning army, navy, commerce, 
tariffs, railways, postal system, telegraphs, civil and criminal law. 
On matters not within the jurisdiction of the Empire each state 
might legislate as it chose. In reality the Reichstag was little 



46o THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

more than an advisory body, with the power of veto of new legisla- 
tion. The mainspring of power was elsewhere — in the Bundesrath 
and in the Kingdom of Prussia. 

The German Empire was unique among federal governments in that 
it was a confederation of monarchical states, which, moreover, were 
very unequal in size and population, ranging from Prussia with 
tion of a population of 40,000,000, and covering two-thirds of the 

monarchical territory, down to Schaumburg-Lippe, with a population 
of 45,000. Three members of the Empire were republics : 
Liibeck, Bremen, and Hamburg. The rest were monarchies. All had 
constitutions and legislatures, more or less liberal. This confedera- 
tion differed from other governments of its class in that the states 
were of unequal voting power in both houses, one state largely pre- 
ponderating, Prussia, a fact explained by its great size, its population, 
and the importance of its historic role. 

The chief representative of the Emperor was the Chancellor. The 
Chancellor was not like the Prime Minister of England, simply one of 
The the ministers. He stood distinct from and above all federal 

ChanceUor officials. There was no imperial cabinet in the German Empire, 
and cabinet, or what is correctly called responsible, governrrient did 
not exist. The Chancellor was appointed by the Emperor, was re- 
movable by the Emperor, was responsible to the Emperor, and was 
not responsible to either Bundesrath or Reichstag. Either or both 
assemblies might vote down his proposals, might even vote lack 
of confidence. It would make no difference to him. He would 
not resign. The only support he needed was that of the Emperor. 

There were other so-called ministers, such as those of foreign 
affairs, of the interior, of education. But these were not like the 
members of the cabinet of the United States or of England. They 
were subordinates of the Chancellor, carrying out his will, and not 
for a moment thinking of resigning because of any adverse vote in 
the popular house, the Reichstag. The powers of the Chancellor 
were great, but as his tenure was absolutely dependent upon the 
favor of the Emperor this really meant that the power of the Emperor 
was great and was irresponsible. The Chancellor might be an 
imposing figure in the state, as Bismarck was ; he might be a mere 
agent of the Emperor, as Bismarck's successors were — for the reason 
that William II, unlike William I, intended to rule and really to be 
the Chancellor himself. 



IMPORTANCE OF THE MONARCH 461 

This was the most important characteristic of the German Empire. 
Unlike England, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, the Scandinavian 
states, the cabinet system of government did not exist in Germany. 
The executive was not subject to the legislative power ; ministers 
might not be turned out of office by adverse majorities. Germany 
was a constitutional state, in the sense that it ];iad a written con- ^j^^ parHa- 
stitution. It was not a parliamentary state. Parliament did mentary sys- 
not have the controlling voice in the state. The monarchs, and exist in °° 
particularly the monarch of Prussia, had that. This was Bis- Germany 
marck's great achievement. His victory over the Prussian Parlia- 
ment had this effect, that it checked the growth of responsible gov- 
ernment in Prussia. So far as insuring self-government, or a large 
measure of it, to the people of Germany was concerned, the consti- 
tution, largely the work of Bismarck, was much inferior to the con- 
stitution framed by the Parliament of Frankfort in 1848. 

The Emperor gained his great power from the fact that he was King 
of Prussia. He was Emperor because he was King. As King he had 
very extensive functions. His functions as Emperor and King 
were ,so connected that it was not easy to distinguish them, powers^of 
As a matter of fact the King of Prussia was very nearly an ^^^ ^f°e °f 
absolute monarch. The Prussian Parliament was far less likely 
to oppose his will than was the Imperial Parliament which, itself, 
was to show only slight independence after 1871. There was no 
parliamentary government in Prussia any more than there was in the 
Empire. 

Since 1871, Germany has had three Emperors, William I (1871- 
1888), Frederick III (March 9-June 15, 1888), and William II, from 
1888 to 1918. 

The history since 1871 naturally falls into two periods, which are in 
many respects well defined, the reign of William I and the reign of 
William II. During the former the real ruler was Prince Bismarck, 
the Chancellor, whose position was one of immense prestige „ . 
and authority. Having in nine years made the King, whom Emperor 
he found upon the point of abdicating, the most powerful ^™ ^ 

ruler in Europe, and having given Germans unity, he remained the 
chief figure in the state twenty years longer until his resignation in 
1890. During the latter period, the reign of William II, the Emperor 
was the real head of the government. 



462 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

THE KULTURKAMPF 

No sooner was the new Empire established than it was torn by a 
fierce rehgious conflict that lasted many years, the so-called Kultur- 
kampf, "war in defense of civilization," a contest between the State 
and the Roman Cath5)lic Church. The wars with Austria and 
A religious France engendered animosity in the field of religion as they 
conflict ^gj-e victories of a Protestant state over two strongly Catholic 

states. The loss of the Pope's temporal power in 1870 embittered 
many Catholics still further and a party was formed in Germany, the 
Center, to work for the restoration of the temporal power and for the 
general interests of the Church. In the first elections to the Reichs- 
tag this party won sixty-three votes. Bismarck did not like this 
appearance of a clerical party in the political arena. He was of the 
opinion that the Church should keep out of politics. Moreover, he 
decidedly objected to what he understood to be the claims of the 
Church that in certain matters, which he regarded as belonging 
exclusively to the State, the Church was superior to the secular 
authority and had the primary right to the allegiance of Catholics. 
The immediate cause of the Kulturkampf was a quarrel among 
Catholics themselves. The proclamation by the Vatican Council in 
1870 of the new dogma of papal infallibility had been opposed 
of the in the Council by the German bishops. But they and the 

Kulturkampf pj-jgg^-g Qf Germany were now required to subscribe to it. 
The large majority did, but some refused. The latter called them- 
selves Old Catholics, proclaiming their adherence to the Church as 
hitherto defined, but rejecting this addition to their creed as false. 
The bishops who accepted it demanded that the Old Catholics should 
be removed from their positions in the universities and schools. 
The Government of Prussia refused to remove them. A religious 
war was shortly in progress which grew more bitter each year. 
First the Imperial Parliament forbade the religious orders to engage 
TheFaik "^ teaching; then, in 1872, it expelled the Jesuits from Ger- 

Laws many. Of all legislation enacted during this struggle the Falk 

or May Laws of the Prussian legislature were the most important 
(passed in May of three successive, years, 1873, 1874, 1875). Bis- 
marck supported them on the ground that the contest was political, 
not religious, that there must be no state within the state, no power 
considering itself superior to the established authorities. He also 



CONFLICT OF CHURCH AND STATE 463 

believed that the whole movement was conducted by those opposed 
to German unity. Anything that imperiled that unity must be 
crushed. These May Laws gave the state large powers over the 
education and appointment of the clergy. They forbade the Roman 
Catholic Church to intervene in any way in civil affairs, or to coerce 
citizens or ofifidals ; they required that all clergymen should pass the 
regular state examinations of the gymnasium, and should study theol- 
ogy for three years at a state university ; that all Catholic seminaries 
should be subject to state inspection. They also established control 
over the appointment and dismissal of priests. A law was passed 
making civil marriage compulsory. This was to reduce the power 
that priests could exercise by refusing to marry a Catholic and a 
Protestant, and now even Old Catholics. Religious orders were 
suppressed. 

Against these laws the Catholics indignantly protested. The Pope 
declared them null and void ; the clergy refused to obey them, and the 
faithful rallied to the support of the clergy. To enforce Conflict of 
them the Government resorted to fines, imprisonment, dep- Church and 
rivation of salary, expulsion from the country. The conflict '^*^ 
spread everywhere, into little villages, as well as into the cities, 
into the universities and schools. It dominated politics for several 
years. The national life was much disturbed, yet the end was not ac- 
complished. In the elections of 1877 the Center succeeded in return- 
ing ninety-two members, and was the largest party in the Reichstag. 
It was evident that the policy was a failure. 

Other questions were becoming prominent, of an economic and 
social character, and Bismarck wished to be free to handle them. 
Particularly requiring attention, in his opinion, and that of Bismarck's 
William I, was a new and most menacing party, the Socialist, retreat 
Bismarck therefore prepared to retreat. The death of Pius IX in 
1878, and the election of Leo XIII, a more conciliatory and dip- 
lomatic Pope, facilitated the change of policy. The anti-clerical 
legislation was gradually repealed, except that concerning civil 
marriage. In return for the measures surrendered Bismarck gained 
the support of the Center for laws which he now had more at 
heart. The only permanent result of this religious conflict was 
the strengthening of the Center or Catholic party, which has been, 
during most of the time since, the strongest party in this Protestant 
country. 



464 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

BISMARCK AND SOCIALISM 

It was in 1878 that Bismarck turned his attention to the Socialist 
party which had for some time been growing, and now seemed menac- 
The growth ^^S- That party was founded by Ferdinand Lassalle, a Sociahst 
of Socialism of 1 848, much influenced by the French school of that day. 
The party, originally appearing in 1848, was shortly broken up by 
persecution and did not reappear until 1863. In 1863 Lassalle 
founded a journal called the Social Democrat. In opposition to this 
party a somewhat different Socialist group was led by Karl Marx. 
These two were rivals until 1875, when a fusion was effected and 
the party platform was adopted at Gotha. This platform denounced 
the existing organization of the economic system, the ownership 
of the means of production solely by the capitalist class and in its 
interest ; it demanded that the state should own them and should 
conduct industries in the interest of society, the largest part of which 
consists of laborers, and that the products of labor should be justly 
^ . distributed ; it aimed at a free state and a socialistic society. 

Demands -^ 

of the Needless to say Germany was neither at that time. That 

ocia ists Germany might be a free state the Socialists demanded uni- 
versal suffrage for all over twenty years of age, women as well as 
men, secret ballot, freedom of the press, freedom of association, 
and indeed the greatest extension of political rights in a democratic 
direction, free and compulsory education, and certain immediate eco- 
nomic and social reforms, such as a progressive income tax, a normal 
working day, and a free Sunday, prohibition of child labor and of all 
forms of labor by women which were dangerous to health or morality, 
laws for the protection of the life and health of workingmen and for 
the inspection of mines and factories. In 1 87 1 the Socialists elected 
two members to the Reichstag, three years later their representation 
increased to nine, and in 1877 to twelve. Their popular votes were : 
in 1871, 124,655 ; in 1874, 351,952 ; and in 1877, 493,288. 

The steady growth of this party aroused the alarm of the ruling 
classes of Germany, which stood for monarchy, aristocracy, the existing 
, economic system, while its aims were destructive of all these. 

Alarm of -' 

the ruling Bismarck had long hated the Socialists, as was natural con- 

ciasses sidering his training and environment, and considering also the 

declarations of the Socialists themselves. Their leaders, Liebknecht 

and Bebel, had opposed the North German Confederation, the war 



BISMARCK AND THE SOCIALISTS 465 

with France, the annexation of Alsace and Lorraine. The Socialists 
expressed openly and freely their entire opposition to the existing 
order in Germany. It was only a question of time when they must 
clash violently with the man who had helped so powerfully to create 
that order, and whose life work henceforth was to consolidate it. 
Again, the Socialist party was radically democratic, and Bismarck 
hated democracy. A conflict between men representing the very 
opposite poles of opinion was inevitable. Bismarck determined to 
crush the Socialists once for all. He would use two methods ; one 
stern repression of Socialist agitation, the other amelioration of the 
conditions of the working class, conditions which alone, he believed, 
caused them to listen to the false and deceptive doctrines of the 
Socialist leaders. 

First came repression. In October, 1878, a law of great severity, 
intended to stamp out completely all Socialist propaganda, was 
passed by the Imperial Parliament. It forbade all associations. Severe 
meetings, and publications having for their object "the sub- ™alnst^the 
version of the social order," or in which "socialistic tendencies " Socialists 
should appear. It gave the police large powers of interference, arrest, 
and expulsion from the country. Martial law might be proclaimed 
where desirable, which meant that, as far as Socialists were con- 
cerned, the ordinary courts would cease to protect individual liberties. 
Practically a mere decree of a police official would suffice to expel 
from Germany any one suspected or accused of being a Socialist. 
This law was enacted for a period of four years. It was later twice 
renewed and remained in force until 1890. It ^as vigorously applied. 
According to statistics furnished by the Socialists themselves, 1400 
publications were suppressed, 1500 persons were imprisoned, 900 
banished, during these twelve years. One might not read the works 
of Lassalle, for instance, even in a public library. 

This law, says a biographer of Bismarck, is very disappointing. 
"We find the Government again having recourse to the same means 
for checking and guarding opinion which Metternich had used Their 
fifty years before." ^ It was, moreover, an egregious failure, failure 
For twelve years the Socialists carried on their propaganda in 
secret. It became evident that their power lay in their ideas and in 
the economic conditions of the working classes, rather than in formal 
organizations, which might be broken up. A paper was published for 
^ Headlam, Bismarck, 409. 



466 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

them in Switzerland and every week thousands of copies found their 
way into the hands of workingmen in Germany, despite the utmost 
vigilance of the police. Persecution in their case, as in that of the 
Roman Catholics, only rendered the party more resolute and active. 
At first it seemed that the law would realize the aims of its sponsors, 
for in the elections of 1881, the first after its passage, the Socialist 
vote fell from about 493,000 to about 312,000. But in 1884 it 

Continued , • oo ^ ^ • n u. 

growth of rose to 549,000; m 1887 to 763,000; m 1890 to 1,427,000, 
the Socialist resulting in the election of thirty-five members to the Reichstag. 
In that year the law was not renewed. The Socialists 
came out of their contest with Bismarck with a popular and par- 
liamentary vote increased threefold. Bismarck, true to his funda- 
mental belief that difficult opponents are best put down by force, not 
won by persuasion, had attempted here, as in the Kulturkampf, to 
settle an annoying question by arbitrary and despotic measures 
enforced ruthlessly by the police and sacrificing what were regarded 
in many other countries as the most precious rights of the indi- 
vidual. 

But he had at no time intended to rest content with merely repres- 
sive measures. He had also intended to win the working classes 
away from the Socialist party by enacting certain laws favoring 
them, by trying to convince them that the state was their real 
benefactor and was deeply interested in their welfare. 

The method by which Bismarck proposed to improve the condition 

of the working class was by an elaborate and comprehensive system of 

State insurance against the misfortunes and vicissitudes of life, 

Sociahsm against sickness, accident, old age, and incapacity. It was 

his desire that any workingman incapacitated in any of these ways 

should not be exposed to the possibility of becoming a pauper, 

but should receive a pension from the state. His policy was called 

State Socialism. His proposals met with vehement opposition, 

both in the Reichstag and among influential classes outside. It 

was only slowly that he carried them through, the Sickness Insurance 

Law in 1883, the Accident Insurance Laws in 1884 and 1885, and the 

Old Age Insurance Law in 1889. These laws are very complicated 

and cannot be described here at length. 

Bismarck a Such was Bismarck's contribution to the solution of the 

pioneer social question, which grew to such commanding importance 

as the nineteenth century wore on. In this legislation Bismarck was 



GERMANY ADOPTS PRINCIPLE OF PROTECTION 467 

a pioneer. His ideas have been studied widely in other countries, 
and his example followed in some. 

The Socialists did not cooperate with him in the passage of these 
laws, which they denounced as entirely inadequate to solve the social 
evils, as only a slight step in the right direction. Nor did Bismarck 
wish their support. They were Social Democrats. Democracy he 
hated. Socialism of the State, controlled by a powerful mon- ^^^ 
arch, was one thing. Socialism carried through by the people ported by 

u 1- • • 1 ^- i. J J- i-i. • i-- the Socialists 

believmg m a democratic government, opposed to the existing 
order in government and society, a very different thing. At the 
very moment that Bismarck secured the passage of the Accident 
Insurance Bill he also demanded the renewal of the law against the 
Socialists. His prophecy, that if these laws were passed the Socialists 
would sound their bird call in vain, has not been fulfilled. That 
party has grown greatly and almost uninterruptedly ever since 
he began his war upon it. 



BISMARCK AND THE POLICY OF PROTECTION 

In 1879, Bismarck brought about a profound change in the financial 
and industrial policy of Germany by inducing Parliament to abandon 
the policy of a low tariff, and comparative free trade, and to Bismarck 
adopt a system of high tariff and pronounced protection. poi°^*^(,^ 
His purposes were twofold. He wished to increase the protection 
revenue of the Empire and to encourage native industries. In 
adopting the principle of protection he was not influenced, he asserted, 
by the theories of economists, but by his own observation of facts. 
He observed that, while England was the only nation following a 
policy of free trade, France and Austria and Russia and the United 
States were pronounced believers in protection and that it was too 
much to ask that Germany should permanently remain the dupe of 
an amiable error. He said that owing to her low tariff Germany had 
been the dumping ground for the overproduction of other countries. 
Now industries must be protected that they might flourish and that 
they might have at least the home market. As this policy had 
proved successful in other countries, notably in the United States, 
he urged that Germans follow their example. 

Bismarck won the day, though not without difficulty. Germany 
entered upon a period of protection, which, growing higher and 



468 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

applied to more and more industries, has continued ever since. 
Bismarck believed that Germany must become rich in order to 
^. be strong ; that she could only become rich by manufactures ; 

gradually and that she could have manufactures only by giving them 
app le protection. The system was worked out gradually and piece- 

meal, as he could not carry his whole plan at once. By means of the 
tariff Bismarck wished to assure Germans the home market. Not 
only was this largely accomplished, but by its means the foreign 
market also was widened. By offering concessions to foreign na- 
tions for concessions from them, Germany gained for her manu- 
factured products an entrance into many other countries, which 
had been denied them before. The prodigious expansion of German 
industry after 1880 is generally regarded in Germany as a vindication 
of this policy. 

ACQUISITION OF COLONIES 

One of the important features of the closing years of Bismarck's 
political career was the beginning of a German colonial empire. In 
his earlier years Bismarck did not believe in Germany's at- 
^Mi^gof tempting the acquisition of colonies. In 1871 he refused 
a colonial ^ demand as prize of war any of the French colonial pos- 
empire sessions. He believed that Germany should consolidate, and 

should not risk incurring the hostility of other nations by entering 
upon the path of colonial rivalry. But colonies, nevertheless, were 
being founded under the spirit of private initiative. Energetic 
merchants from Hamburg and Bremen established trading stations 
in Africa, and the islands of the Pacific, for the purpose of selling 
their goods and acquiring tropical products, such as cocoa, coffee, 
rubber, spices. The aid of the Government was invoked at various 
times, but Bismarck held aloof. The interest aroused in the exploits 
of these private companies gave rise towards 1880 to a definite colonial 
party and the formation of a Colonial Society, which later became im- 
portant. 

The change in the policy of the Government, however, from one of 
aloofness to one of energetic participation and acquisition of colonies 
A result of was largely a result of the adoption of the policy of protection 
of ^the policy ^^^ activc governmental encouragement of manufactures 
of protection and commerce. In the debate on the tariff bill of 1879 Bis- 
marck said that it was desirable to protect manufactures, that 



COLONIAL POLICIES 469 

thus a greater demand for labor would arise, that more people 
could live in Germany, and that therefore the emigration which 
had for years drawn tens of thousands from the country, particularly 
to the United States, would be decreased. But to develop manu- 
factures to the utmost, Germany must have new markets for her 
products ; and here colonies would be useful. In 1884 he adopted a 
vigorous colonial policy, supporting and expanding the work of the 
private merchants and travelers. In that year Germany seized a 
number of points in Africa, in the southwest, the west, and the xhe Gennan 
east. A period of diplomatic activity began, leading in the next colonies 
few years to treaties with England and other powers, resulting in the 
fixing of the boundaries of the various claimants to African territory. 1 
This is the partition of Africa described elsewhere.^ Germany thus | 
acquired a scattered African empire of great size, consisting of, 
Kamerun, Togoland, German Southwest Africa, German East 
Africa ; also a part of New Guinea. Later some of the Samoan 
Islands came into her possession, and in 1899 she purchased the 
Caroline and the Ladrone Islands, excepting Guam, from Spain 
for about four million dollars. 

THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE 

While domestic affairs formed the chief concern of Bismarck after 
the war with France, yet he followed the course of foreign affairs with 
the same closeness of attention that he had shown before, and manipu- 
lated them with the same display of subtlety and audacity that had 
characterized his previous diplomatic career. His great achieve- 
ment in diplomacy in these years was the formation of the „. 

Bismarck s 

Triple Alliance, an achievement directed, like all the actions of diplomatic 
his career, toward the consolidation and exaltation of his ^<^^»®'^™e'»t 
country. The origin of this alliance is really to be found in the 
Treaty of Frankfort, which sealed the humiliation of France. The 
wresting from France of Alsace and Lorraine inevitably rendered 
that country desirous of a war of revenge, of a war for their recovery. 
This remained the open sore of Europe after 1871, occasioning 
numerous, incontestable, and widespread evils. Firmly resolved 
to keep what he had won, Bismarck's chief consideration was to 
render such a war hopeless, therefore, perhaps, impossible. France 

» See Chapter XXIX. 



470 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

must be isolated so completely that she would not dare to move. 
This was accomplished, first by the friendly understanding brought 
Isolation of about by Bismarck between the three rulers of eastern Europe, 
France ^hg Empcrors of Germany, Russia, and Austria. But this 

understanding was shattered by events in the Balkan peninsula 
during the years from 1876 to 1878. In the Balkans, Russia and 
Austria were rivals, and their rivalry was thrown into high relief 
at the Congress of Berlin, over which Bismarck presided. Russia, 
unaided, had carried on a war with Turkey, and had imposed the 
Treaty of San Stefano upon her conquered enerhy, only to find 
that Europe would not recognize that treaty, but insisted upon 
its revision at an international congress, and at that congress she 
found Bismarck, to whom she had rendered inestimable services in 
the years so critical for Prussia, from 1863 to 1870, now acting as the 
friend of Austria, a power which had taken no part in the conflict, 
but was now intent upon drawing chestnuts from the fire with the 
aid of the Iron Chancellor. The Treaty of Berlin was a humiliation 
for Russia and a striking success for Austria, her rival, which was 
now empowered to "occupy" Bosnia and Herzegovina (hert-se-go- 
ve'-na). No wonder that the Russian Chancellor, Gortchakoff 
(gor-cha-kof), pronounced the Congress of Berlin "the darkest 
episode in his career," and that Alexander II declared that "Bis- 
marck had forgotten his promises of 1870." By favoring one of his 
allies Bismarck had alienated the other. In this fact lay the germ 
of the two great international combinations of the future, the Triple 
and Dual Alliances, factors of profound significance in the recent 
history of Europe. 

Of these the first in order of creation and in importance was the 
Triple Alliance. Realizing that Russia was mortally offended at his 
conduct, and that the friendly understanding with her was 
German over, Bismarck turned for compensation to a closer union 

Treaty of y^[^^ Austria, and concluded a treaty with her October 7, 1879. 
This treaty provided that if either Germany or Austria were 
attacked by Russia the two should be bound "to lend each other 
reciprocal aid with the whole of their military power, and, sub- 
sequently, to conclude no peace except conjointly and in agree- 
ment" ; that if either Germany or Austria should be attacked by 
another power — as, for instance, France — the ally should remain 
neutral, but that if this enemy should be aided by Russia, then 



THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE 471 

Germany and Austria should act together with their full military 
force, and should make peace in common. Thus this Austro- 
German Treaty of 1879 established a defensive alliance aimed par- 
ticularly against Russia, to a lesser degree against France. The 
treaty was secret and was not published until 1887. Meanwhile, 
in 1882, Italy joined the alliance, irritated at France because „ , 

- ■' Entrance of 

of her seizure the year before of Tunis, a country which Italy Italy into 
herself had coveted as a seat for colonial expansion but which *^^ alliance 
Bismarck had encouraged France to take, wishing to make one more 
enemy for France, and thus to force that enemy, Italy, into the 
alliance, highly unnatural in many ways, with Austria, her old- 
time enemy, and with Germany. Thus was formed the Triple 
Alliance. The text of that alliance has never been published, but its 
purpose and character may probably be derived from that of the 
Austro-German Alliance, which was now expanded to include 
another power. The alliance was made for a period of years, but 
was constantly renewed and remained in force until 191 5. It was a 
defensive alliance, designed to assure its territory to each of the 
contracting parties. 

Thus was created a combination of powers which dominated central 
Europe, from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, and which rested 
on a military force of over two million men. At its head stood 
Germany. Europe entered upon a period of German leadership in 
international affairs which was later to be challenged by the rise 
of a new alliance, that of Russia and France, which for various 
reasons, however, was slow in forming. 

THE REIGN OF WILLIAM II 

On the 9th of March, 1888, Emperor William I died at the age 
of ninety-one. He was succeeded by his' son, Frederick III, in 
his fifty-seventh year. The new Emperor was a man of 
moderation, of liberalism in politics, an admirer of the Eng- 
lish constitution. It is supposed that, had he lived, the autocracy 
of the ruler would have given way to a genuine parliamentar}- system 
like that of England, and that an era of greater liberty would have 
been inaugurated. But he was already a dying man, ill of cancer of 
the throat. His reign was one of physical agony patiently borne. 
Unable to use his voice, he could only indicate his wishes by writing 



472 



THE GERMAN EMPIRE 



Character- 
istics of 
William II 



or by signs. The reign was soon over, before the era of liberalism 
had time to dawn. Frederick was King and Emperor only from 
March 9 to June 15, 1888. 

He was succeeded by his son, William II. The new ruler was 
twenty-nine years of age, a young man of very active mind, of fer- 
tile imagination, versa- 
tile, ambitious, self-con- 
fident, a man of unusual 
vigor. In his earliest ut- 
terances, the new sovereign 
showed his enthusiasm for the 
army and for religious ortho- 
doxy. He held the doctrine 
of the divine origin of his 
power with medieval fervor, 
expressing it with frequency 
and in dramatic fashion. It 
was evident that a man of 
such a character would wish 
to govern, and not simply 
reign. He would not be will- 
ing long to efface himself be- 
hind the imposing figure of 
the great Chancellor. Bis- 
marck had prophesied that 
the Emperor would be his 
own Chancellor, yet he did 
not have the wisdom to re- 
sign when the old Emperor 
_ , J died, and to deparjt with 

The forced ^ 

resignation of dignity. He clung tO 

power. From the be- 
ginning friction developed between the two. They thought differ- 
ently, felt differently. The fundamental question was, who should 
rule in Germany? The struggle was for supremacy since there 
was no way in which two persons so self-willed and autocratic 
could divide power. As Bismarck stayed on when he saw that his 
presence was no longer desired, the Emperor, not willing to be over- 
shadowed by so commanding and illustrious a minister, finally 




Bismarck 



Dropping the Pilot 

Cartoon by Sir John Tenniel in Punch, 

March 2g, i8go. 



THE ANTI-SOCIALIST POLICY ABANDONED 473 

demanded his resignation in 1890. Thus in bitterness and humilia- 
tion ended the political career of a man who, according to Bismarck 
himself, had "cut a figure in the history of Germany and Prussia." 
He lived several years longer, dying in 1898 at the age of eighty- 
three, leaving as his epitaph, "A faithful servant of Emperor Wil- 
liam I." Thus vanished from view a man who will rank in history 
as a great statesman and diplomatist. 

After 1 890 the personality of William 1 1 was the decisive factor in 
the state. His Chancellors were, in fact as well as in theory, his 
servants, carrying out the master's wish. Down to the outbreak of 
the Great War there were four: Caprivi, 1890- 1894; Hohenlohe, 
1894-1900; von Billow, 1900-1909, and Bethmann-HoUweg, from 
July, 1909. That war was to add three others to the list, whose 
terms were to prove exceedingly brief, Michaelis, Hertling, and 
Prince Maximilian of Baden. 

The extreme political tension was at first somewhat relieved by 
the removal of Bismarck from the scene, by this "dropping of the 
pilot," after thirty-eight years of continuous service. The ^j^^ Emperor 
early measures under the new regime showed a liberal tend- and the 
ency . The Anti-Socialist laws, expiring in 1 890, were not 
renewed. This had been one of the causes of friction between the 
Emperor and the Chancellor. Bismarck wished them renewed, and 
their stringency increased. The Emperor wished to try milder 
methods, hoping to undermine the Socialists completely by further 
measures of social and economic amelioration, to kill them with 
kindness. The repressive laws lapsing, the Socialists reorganized 
openly, and have conducted an aggressive campaign ever since. 
The Emperor, soon recognizing the futility of anodynes, became their 
bitter enemy, and began to denounce them vehemently, but no new 
legislation has been passed against them, although this has been 
several times attempted. 

The reign of William II was notable for the remarkable expansion 
of industry and commerce, which rendered Germany the redoubtable 
rival of England and the United States. In colonial and _ 

'^ Expansion 

foreign affairs an aggressive policy was followed. German of industry 
colonies proved of little importance, entailed great expense, ^° '* ^ 
and yielded only small returns. But the desire for a great colonial 
empire became a settled policy of the Government, and seized the 
popular imagination. 



474 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

Connected with the growing interest of Germany in commercial 
and colonial affairs went an increasing interest in the navy. Strong 
The German on land for fifty years, William II desired that Germany 
°*^ should be strong on the sea, that she might act with decision 

in any part of the world, that her diplomacy, which was permeated 
with the idea that nothing great should be done in world politics 
anywhere, in Europe, in Asia, in Africa, without her consent, might 
be supported by a formidable navy. To make that fleet powerful 
was a constant and a growing preoccupation of the Emperor. 

THE RISE OF SOCIAL DEMOCRACY 

In the political world the rise of the Social Democratic party was 
the most important phenomenon. It represented not merely a 
desire for a revolution in the economic sphere, it also represented a 
protest against the autocratic government of the ruler, a demand 
for democratic institutions. While Germany had a Constitution and 
a Parliament, the monarch was invested with vast power. Parlia- 
ment did not control the Government, as the ministers were not 
responsible to it. There was freedom of speech in Parliament, but 
practically during most of this reign it did not exist outside. Hun- 
dreds of men have, during the past twenty years, been imprisoned for 
such criticisms of the Government as in other countries are the 
current coin of discussion. This is the crime of lese-majeste, which, 
as long as it exists, prevents a free political life. The growth of 
the Social Democratic party to some extent represented mere liberal- 
Growth of ism, not adherence to the economic theory of the Socialists. 
DeimKratic ^^ ^^^ ^^ great reform and opposition party of Germany. It 
party had, in 1907, the largest popular vote of any party, 3,260,000.^ 

Yet the Conservatives with less than 1,500,000 votes elected in 1907 
eighty-three members to the Reichstag to the forty-three of the 
Socialists. The reason was this : the electoral districts had not been 
altered since they were originally laid out in 1 869-1 871, though popu- 
lation had vastly shifted from country to city. The cities have 
grown rapidly since then, and it is in industrial centers that the 
Socialists are strongest. Berlin with a population in 1871 of 600,000 
had six members in the Reichstag. It still had only that number in 

' In igi2 the Socialists cast 4,250,000 votes and elected no members to the Reichs- 
tag, thus displacing the Center as the largest party in that body. 



THE POWER OF PRUSSIA IN GERMANY 475 

1907, although its population was over 2,000,000, and although it 
would have been entitled to twenty members had equal electoral 
districts existed. These the Socialists demanded, but for this very 
reason the Government refused the demand. The extreme oppo- 
nents of the Social Democrats even urged that universal suffrage, 
guaranteed by the Constitution, be abolished, as the only way to 
crush the party. To this extreme the Government did not dare to go. 

In the closing years of the reign of William II several questions 
were much discussed ; the question of the electoral reform in Prussia ; 
of the redistribution of seats, both in the Prussian Landtag and xwo leading 
the Imperial Reichstag ; and of ministerial responsibility. demands 

Prussia was the state that in practice ruled the German Empire. 
This was what was intended by Bismarck when he drew up the 
Constitution of the Empire, it was precisely the object of his 
entire policy. The Constitution was based on the two chief ascendancy 
articles of Bismarck's creed, the power of the monarch and the ° Prussia 
ascendancy of Prussia. This was the accepted idea of the governing 
classes down to the outbreak of the war. As was said in 1914 
by Prince von Billow, the most important Chancellor of the Empire 
since Bismarck, "Prussia attained her greatness as a country of 
soldiers and officials, and as such she was able to accomplish the 
work of German union ; to this day she is still, in all essentials, a 
state of soldiers and officials." The governing classes were, in 
Prussia, which, in turn, governed Germany, the monarchy, the 
aristocracy, and a bureaucracy of military and civil officials, respon- 
sible to the King alone. The determining factor in the state was the 
personality of the King. 

GERMANY'S ELECTORAL SYSTEM 

Neither the Empire, nor the Kingdom of Prussia, was governed 
by democratic institutions. The Kingdom lagged far behind the 
Empire, and, so great was its power, impeded the develop- 
ment of liberty in the Empire. Prussia in 1914 was a country of 
40,000,000 people. It had had a legislature of two chambers since 
1850, and the lower house of the legislature was chosen by universal 
suffrage. Every Prussian man who had attained his twenty-fifth 
year had the vote. Was Prussia, therefore, a democracy? Not ex- 
actly, for this universal suffrage was most marvelously manipu- 



476 



THE GERMAN EMPIRE 



lated. The exercise of the right to vote was so arranged that the 

ballot of the poor man was practicall}^ annihilated. Universal suffrage 

Prussia's was rendered illusory. The way in which this was done has 

lystem of^ already been described. The voters were divided in each electo- 

eiection ral district into three classes according to wealth. The amount 

of taxes, paid by the district, was divided into three equal parts. 

Those taxpayers who 
paid the first third were 
grouped into one class ; 
those, more numerous, 
who paid the second 
third, into another class ; 
those who paid the re- 
mainder, into ■ still an- 
other class. The result 
was that a very few rich 
men were set apart by 
themselves, the less rich 
by themselves, and the 
poor by themseh'es. Each 
of these groups, voting 
separately, elected an 
equal number of dele- 
gates to a convention, 
which convention chose 
the representatives of 
that constituency to the 
lower house of the Prus- 
sian Parliament. 

Thus in every electo- 
ral convention two- thirds 
of the members belonged to the wealthy or well-to-do class. There 
„ ^ was no chance in such a system for the poor, for the masses, 

democratic This System gave an enormous preponderance of political power 
system ^^ ^j^^ ^-^^ yj^^ ^^^^ class consisted of very few men, in some 

districts of only one ; the second was sometimes twenty times as 
numerous, the third sometimes a hundred, or even a thousand times. 
Thus, though every man had the suffrage the vote of a single rich 
man might have as great weight as the votes of a thousand working- 




\VlLLiA.M 11 

From a photograph taken in 1914. 



THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM 477 

men. Universal suffrage was thus manipulated in such a way as to 
defeat democracy decisively and to consolidate a privileged class 
in power in the only branch of the government that had even the 
appearance of being of popular origin. Bismarck, no friend of lib- 
eralism, once characterized this electoral system as the worst ever 
created. Its shrieking injustice was shown by the fact that in 1900 
the Social Democrats, who actually cast a majority of the votes, got 
only seven seats out of nearly 400. It was one of the most undemo- 
cratic systems in existence. 

In 1908 there were 293,000 voters in the first class, 1,065,240 in 
the second, 6,324,079 in the third. The first class represented Relative 
4 per cent, the second 14 per cent, the third 82 per cent of the importance 
population. In Cologne the first class comprised 370 electors, classes 
the second 2,584, while the third had 22,324. The first class of voters 
chose the same number of electors as the third. Thus 370 rich men 
had the same voting capacity as 22,324 proletarians. In Saar- 
briicken the Baron von Stumm formed the first class all by himself 
and announced complacently that he did not suffer from his isolation. 
In one of the Berlin districts Herr Heffte, a manufacturer of sausages, 
formed the first class. 

This system would seem to be outrageous enough by reason of 
its monstrous plutocratic caste. But this was not all. This reaction- 
arjr edifice was appropriately crowned by another device — 
oral voting. Neither in the primary nor the secondary vot- 
ing was a secret ballot used. Voting was not even by a written or 
printed ballot, but by the spoken word. Thus every one exercised 
his right publicly in the presence of his superior or his patron or 
employer or his equals or the official representative of the King. 
In such a country as Prussia, where the police were notoriously 
ubiquitous, what a weapon for absolutism ! The great landowners, 
the great manufacturers, the State, could easily bring all the pressure 
they desired to bear upon the voter, exercising his wretched rudiment 
of political power. Needless to say, under such a system as this 
the working classes were almost entirely unrepresented in the 
Prussian legislature. 

Again, with the exception of a thoroughly insignificant measure 
passed in 1906, no changes were made in the electoral districts of 
Prussia after 1858. No account was taken of the changes in the 
population and there were consequently great disparities between 



478 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

the various districts. Thus, in a recent election in the Province 

of East Prussia, the actual ratio of inhabitants to each deputy was 

63,000, while in Berlin it was 170,000. In one election, 

districts un- 3,000,000 inhabitants of four large Prussian districts returned 

changed since q representatives, while three other millions, divided among 

forty smaller districts, returned 66. Naturally, the demand grew 

constantly louder that many districts should be partially or wholly 

disfranchised or merged with others, and that other districts should 

receive a larger representation. No attempt, however, was made 

to meet this demand. 

In the Empire, also, a similar problem became yearly more acute. 
In 1 87 1, Germany was divided into 397 constituencies for the Reichs- 
tag. The number remained the same from that time down to 

Representa- ° 

tion in the the war and, indeed, until the Reichstag disappeared in the 
Reichstag convulsions of the closing months of 191 8. Not a single 
district gained or lost in representation. Yet from 1871 to 19 14 the 
population of the Empire increased from about forty-one millions 
to over sixty-five millions, and there was a great shifting in popula- 
tion from the country to the cities. One of the divisions of Berlin, 
with a population of 697,000, elected one representative, whereas 
the petty principality of Waldeck, with a population of 59,000, 
elected one. The 851,000 voters of Greater Berlin returned eight 
members ; the same number of voters in fifty of the smaller con- 
stituencies returned forty-eight. A reform of these gross inequalities 
was widely demanded, but the demand passed unheeded. 

Another subject much discussed during the later j^ears of the 
Empire was that concerning ministerial responsibility. The in- 
Ministeriai discretions of Emperor William II made this from time to 
responsibii- time a burning question. An interview with him, in which 
^^ he spoke with great freedom of the strained relations between 

Germany and Great Britain, was published in the London Telegraph 
on October 28, 1908. At once was seen a phenomenon not witnessed 
in Germany since the founding of the Empire. There was a violent 
protest against the irresponsible actions of the Emperor, actions 
subject to no control, and yet easily capable of bringing about a war. 
Newspapers of all shades of party affiliation displayed a freedom 
of utterance and of censure unparalleled in Germany. All parties 
in the Reichstag expressed their emphatic disapproval. The inci- 
dent, however, was not sufficient to bring about the introduction of 



POWER OF THE SOVEREIGNS OF GERMANY 479 

the system of the responsibihty of ministers for all the acts of the 
monarch, and the control of the ministry by the majority of the 
Reichstag, in short, the parliamentary system in its essential 
feature. 

IMPOTENCE OF THE REICHSTAG 

Neither in the Empire, nor in the Kingdom of Prussia, nor in 
any of the other states that composed the Empire, did the elected 
chamber control the Government. In every case the Prince ^, ^j 
.had an absolute veto. Where there were second chambers, veto 
as in many of the states, they were not elected by the voters, *^^°'"*® 
but were either based on heredity or on appointment by the 
ruler or by certain narrow organizations. In any case the second 
chambers were a bulwark of a privileged class. And in Prussia, as 
we have seen, even the so-called popular house was merely another 
name for a privileged class. Neither in the Empire nor in the 
individual states were the ministers controlled by the popular 
assemblies. The assemblies might vote a lack of confidence as 
often as they felt like it. The ministers would go right on as long 
as the Emperor, King, Grand Duke, or Prince desired. In none of 
the German states could the constitution be amended without the 
consent of the sovereign of that state. The constitution of the 
Empire could not be amended without the consent of one man, 
William II, for a constitutional amendment must be passed not 
only by the Reichstag but by the Bundesrath, and the constitution 
provided that no amendment could pass the Bundesrath if fourteen 
votes were cast against it. In that body Prussia had seventeen 
votes and those votes were cast as the King of Prussia directed. 
If ever}' individual in Germany except this one, and including the 
other Kings and Dukes, had desired a change in the constitution they 
could not have secured it if William II said "No" ! 

The power of the Prussian crown was virtually absolute — "ab- 
solutism under constitutional forms," as Rudolph Gneist, once 
considered in Germany a great authority on public law, said years 
ago. In the economic sphere Germany was enterprising, progres- 
sive, successful, highly modern ; in the intellectual sphere she was 
active and productive ; but in the political sphere she was in a state 
of arrested development. And it had been the amazing triumphs of 
Bismarck, based on force, that had caused the arrest. German 



48o THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

legislatures were impotent and ineffective. For all practical pur- 
poses the Reichstag was merely a debating club, and a de- 

The 

Reichstag bating club that had no power of seeing that its will was 
a hall of carried out. As late as January, 1914, Dr. Friedrich Nau- 

6clioes 

mann, of "Middle Europe" fame, described the humiliating 
position of the body of which he was a member in the following 
words : 

"We on the Left are altogether in favor of the parliamentary' 
regime, by which we mean that the Reichstag cannot forever remain 
in a position of subordination. Why does the Reichstag sit at all, 
why does it pass resolutions, if behind it is a waste paper basket 
into which these resolutions are thrown ? The problem is to change 
the impotence of the Reichstag into some sort of power. . . . The 
man who compared this House to a hall of echoes was not far wrong. 
. . . When one asks the question, 'What part has the Reichstag 
in German history as a whole ? ' it will be seen that the part is a very 
limited one." 

The effective seat of political power in Germany was, as it had 
always been, in the monarchs. Germans might have the right to 
vote, but of what value was it if the vote led nowhere, if the body 
elected by the voters was carefully and completely nullified by other 
bodies, princes and aristocratic hereditary upper chambers, over 
which the voters had no control ? 

Prussia was the strongest obstacle the democratic movement 

of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries encountered. Germany 

Prussia the i^i IQH was less liberal than in 1848. The most serious blow 

obstacle to that the principle of representative government received 

emocracy dyj-ing that century was the one she received at the hands of 

Bismarck. We have expert testimony of the highest and most 

official sort that the effects of that blow were not outlived. Prince 

von Billow, writing in 1914, said : "Liberalism, in spite of its change 

of attitude in national questions, has to this day not recovered from 

the catastrophic defeat which Prince Bismarck inflicted nearly half 

a century ago on the party of progress which still clings to the ideals 

and principles of 1848." 

The situation was still further defined by the utterance of Pro- 
fessor Delbriick, successor to Treitschke in the chair of modern 
history in the University of Berlin, who wrote in 19 14 to the effect 
that "Anyone who has any familiarity with our officers and 



THE GERMAN PARLIAMENT AND THE ARMY 481 

generals knows that it would take another Sedan, inflicted on us in- 
stead of by us, before they would acquiesce in the control of the 
Army by the German Parliament." Here was a very clear in- 
dication as to where real power lay in Germany. One has only not^conTroUed 
to recall the great chapters in English history which tell of the ^^ . 

-^ Parliament 

Struggle for liberty to know that it has been obtained solely 
by the recognition of the supremacy of Parliament over royal pre- 
rogative, over military power. 

The German state was the most autocratic in Western Europe ; 
it was also the most militaristic. Fundamental individual liberties, 
regarded as absolutely vital in England, France, America, and Ge^njany 
many other states, had never been possessed by Germans, nor a mUitary 
were they possessed in 19 14. Germany was rich, vigorous, ™°'^*'''^ ^ 
powerful, instructed. It was not free. A military monarchy is 
the very opposite of a democratic state. Prince von Billow says, in 
his recent book. Imperial Germany, "Despite the abundance of 
merits and the great qualities with which the German nation is 
endowed, political talent has been denied it." Any citizen of a 
free country knows that that talent grows only where an opportunity 
has been given it to grow. It need occasion no surprise that Momm- 
sen, the historian of Rome, writing in 1903, should say of his own 
country, "There are no longer free citizens." Instead there were 
industrious, energetic, educated, ambitious, and submissive subjects. 

REFERENCES 

The Government of the German Empire : Ogg, Governments of Europe, 
pp. 210-228; Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. I, 
pp. 240-285; Fife, The German Empire between Two Wars, pp. 101-138. 

The Kulturkampf : Headlam, Bismarck, pp. 394-404 ; Seignobos, The 
Political History of Europe Since .1814, pp. 491-496; Robinson and Beard, 
Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 178-185 ; Cambridge Modern 
History, Vol. XII, pp. 145-152. 

Measures against the Socialists : Dawson, German Socialism and 
Ferdinand Lassalle, pp. 247-278; Headlam, pp. 407-411 ; Fife, pp. 177-183. 

Bismarck and Social Reform : Ogg, Social Progress in Contemporary 
Europe, pp. 154-263; Dawson, Bismarck and State Socialism, pp. 23-36, 72- 
127; Robinson and Beard, Vol. II, pp. 185-192. 

Industrial Development of Germany : Ogg, Social Progress in Contem- 
porary Europe, pp. 11 7-1 19, 123-124; Dawson, Evolution of Modern Germany; 
Fife, Chap. VIII. 



482 THE GERMAN EMPIRE 

Bismarck's Foreign and Colonial Policies : Marriott and Robertson, 
The Evolution of Prussia, pp. 399-408, 416-423; Headlam, pp. 405-408, 423- 
427 ; Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, pp. 1-37. 

Dismissal and Death of Bismarck : Headlam, pp. 440-463 ; Robinson 
and Beard, Vol. II, pp. 200-203. ' 

Reign of William II: Marriott and Robertson, pp. 424-446; Gooch, 
History of Our Time (Home University Library), pp. 82-97; Priest, Germany 
Since 1740, pp. 146-184; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 165-173; 
Seymour, Chaps. IV-V; Fife, passim; Tower, C, Germany of To-day (Home 
University Library) ; Schmitt, England and Germany, Chaps. Ill, IV, VIII-XI ; 
Prothero, German Policy before the War. 

Consult also on German history under the Empire two books recently pub- 
lished : Robertson, Bismarck, and Dawson, The German Empire, 1867 -igi4, and 
the Unity Movement. 



CHAPTER XXIV 

FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

The Third Republic was proclaimed, as we have seen, by the 
Parisians on September 4, 1870, after the news of the disaster of 
Sedan had reached the capital. A Provisional Government of 
National Defense was immediately installed. This government 
gave way in February, 1871, to a National Assembly of 750 members 
elected by universal suffrage for a single purpose, to make peace 
with Germany. A majority of the members of this National As- 
sembly, which met first at Bordeaux, were Monarchists. The xhe National 
reason was that the monarchical candidates favored the mak- Assembly 
ing of a peace, whereas many republican leaders, with Gambetta 
at their head, wished to continue the war. The mass of the peasants 
desiring peace therefore voted for the peace candidates. There is 
nothing to show that thereby they expressed a wish for monarchy. 
The Assembly of Bordeaux made the peace, ceding Alsace and 
Lorraine, and assuming the enormous war indemnity. But peace 
did not return to France as a result of the Treaty of Frankfort. The 
"Terrible Year," as the French call it, of 1 870-1 871, had more horrors 
in store. Civil war followed the war with the Germans, xhe "Tern- 
shorter but exceeding it in ferocity, a war between those in ^'® ^^^^ " 
control of the city of Paris and the Government of France as repre- 
sented by the Assembly of Bordeaux. That Assembly had chosen 
Thiers as "Chief of the Executive Power," pending "the nation's 
decision as to the definitive form of government." Thus the fun- 
damental question was postponed. Thiers was chosen for no definite 
term ; he was the servant of the Assembly to carry out its wishes, 
and might be dismissed by it at any moment. 

THE COMMUNE 

Between the Government and the people of Paris serious disagree- 
ments immediately arose, which led quickly to the war of the Commune. 
Paris had proclaimed the Republic. But the Republic was not yet 

483 



484 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

sanctioned by France, and existed only de facto. On the other hand, 

the National Assembly was controlled by Monarchists, and it had 

postponed the determination of the permanent institutions of 

mune and the the country. Did not this simply mean that it would abolish 

National ^^ Republic and proclaim the Monarchy, when it should judge 

the moment propitious? This fear, only too well justified, 
that the Assembly was hostile to the Republic, was the fundamental 
cause of the Commune. Paris lived in daily dread of this event. 
Paris was ardently Republican. For ten years under the Empire 
it had been returning Republicans to the Chamber of Deputies. 
These men did not propose to let a coup d'etat like that of Louis 
Napoleon in 1851 occur again. Various acts of the Assembly were 
well adapted to deepen and intensify the feeling of dread uncer- 
tainty. The Assembly showed its distrust of Paris by voting 

Assembly in March, 1871, that it would henceforth sit in Versailles. 

removed to jj^ other words, a small and sleepy town, and one associated 

Versailles 

with the history of monarchy, was to be the capital of France 
instead of the great city which had sustained the tremendous siege 
and by her self-sacrifice and suffering had done her best to hold high 
the honor of the land. Not only was Paris wounded in her pride 
by this act, which showed such unmistakable suspicion of her, but 
she suffered also in her material interests at a time of great financial 
distress. The Government did nothing to relieve this distress, 
but greatly accentuated it by several unwise measures. 

There was in Paris a considerable population having diverse 
revolutionary tendencies, anarchists, Jacobins, Socialists — whose 
leaders worked with marked success among the restless, poverty- 
stricken masses of the great city. Out of this unrest it was easy for 
an insurrection to grow. The insurrectionary spirit spread with 
great rapidity until it developed into a war between Paris and the 
Versailles Government. Attempts at solving the difficulties by 
conciliation having failed, the Government undertook to subdue the 
. city. This necessitated a regular siege of Paris, the second of 
siege of that Unhappy city within a year. This time, however, the siege 

^^^^^ was conducted by Frenchmen, the Germans, who controlled 

the forts to the north of Paris, looking on. It lasted nearly two 
months, from April 2 to May 21, when the Versailles troops forced 
their entrance into the city. Then followed seven days' ferocious 
fighting in the streets, the Communists more and more desperate 



THE LIBERATION OF THE TERRITORY 485 

and frenzied, the Versailles army more and more revengeful and 
sanguinary. This was the "Bloody Week," during, which Paris 
suffered much more than she had from the bombardment of the 
Germans — a week of fearful destruction of life and property. The 
horrors of incendiarism were added to those of slaughter. Finally 
the awful agony was brought to a close. The revenge taken by the 
Government was heavy. It punished right and left summarily. 
Many were shot on the spot without any form of trial. Arrests 
and trials went on for years. Thousands were sent to tropical penal 
colonies. Other thousands were sentenced to hard labor. The 
rage of this monarchical assembly was slow in subsiding. 

THE GOVERNMENT OF THIERS 

Having put down the insurrection of Paris and signed the hard 
treaty with Germany, France was at peace. The Republicans 
thought that the Assembly ought now to dissolve, arguing that France at 
it had been elected to make peace, and nothing else. The p®^<=^ 
Assembly decided, however, that it had full powers of legislation on 
all subjects, including the right to make the Constitution. The 
Assembly remained in power for nearly five years, refusing to dissolve. 

But before taking up the difficult work of making a Constitution 
it cooperated for two years with Thiers (tyar) in the necessary work 
of reorganization. The most imperative task was that of ., .^j^^ 
getting the Germans out of the country. Under the skillful Liberator of 
leadership of Thiers, the payment of the enormous war in- ^ ^"' °'^^ 
demnity, five billion francs, was undertaken with energy and carried 
out with celerity. In September, 1873, the last installment was paid 
and the last German soldiers went home. The soil of France was 
freed nearly six months earlier than was provided by the treaty. 
For his great services in this initial work of reconstruction the 
National Assembly voted that Thiers had "deserved well of the 
country" and the people spontaneously acclaimed him as "The 
Liberator of the Territory." 

The reconstruction of the army was also urgent and was under- 
taken in the same spirit of patriotism, entailing heavy personal 
sacrifices. A law was passed in 1872 instituting compulsory Army re- 
military service. Five years of service in the active army construction 
were henceforth to be required in most cases. The law really 



486 



FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 



established in France the Prussian military system, so successful 
in crushing all opponents. We now see the beginning of that op- 
pressive militarism which became the most characteristic feature 
of contemporary Europe. Other nations considered that they were 
forced to imitate Prussia in order to assure their own safety in the 
future. In the case of 
France the necessity was 
entirely obvious. 

In this work of recon- 
struction the Assembly 
„.. and Thiers were 

Thiers 

and the able to work to- 

Republic gg^^gj. ^^ ^^^ ^j^^jg 

harmoniously. Now that 

this was accomplished the 

Monarchists of the As- 
sembly resolved to abolish 

the Republic and restore 

the Monarchy. They 

soon found that they had 

in Thiers a man who 

would not abet them in 

their project. Thiers was 

originally a believer in 

constitutional monarchy, 

but he was not afraid of 

a republican government, 

and during the years after 

1870 he came to believe 

that a Republic was, for 

France, at the close of a turbulent century, the only possible form 

of government. "There is," he said, "only one throne, and there 

are three claimants for a seat on it." He discovered a happy 

formula in favor of the Republic, "It is the form of government 

which divides us least." And again, "Those parties who want a 

monarchy, do not want the same monarchy." By which phrases 
The he accurately described a curious situation. The Monarchists, 

Monarchists while they constituted a majority of the Assembly, were divided 

into three parties, no one of which was in the majority. There 




Thiers 
After the portrait by L. Bonnat, 1876. 



THIERS AND THE MONARCHISTS 487 

were Legitimists, Orleanists, and Bonapartists. The Legitimists up- 
held the right of the grandson of Charles X, the Count of Chambord ; 
the Orleanists, the right of the grandson of Louis Philippe, the Count 
of Paris ; the Bonapartists, of Napoleon III, or his son. The Mon- 
archist parties could unite to prevent a definite legal establishment of 
the Republic ; they could not unite to establish the monarchy, 
as each wing wished a different monarch. Out of this division arose 
the only chance the Third Republic had to live. As the months 
v/ent by, the Monarchists felt that Thiers was becoming constantly 
iHore of a republican, which was true.* If a monarchical restoration 
was to be attempted, therefore, Thiers must be gotten out of the 
way. Consequently, in May, 1873, the Assembly forced him to 
resign and immediately elected Marshal MacMahon (mak-ma-6h') 
president to prepare the way for the coming monarch. 

THE FRAMING OF THE CONSTITUTION 

Earnest attempts were made forthwith to bring about a restoration 
of the monarchy. This could be done by a fusion of the Legitimists 
and the Orleanists. Circumstances were particularly favorable xhe Count 
for the accomplishment of such a union. The Count of Cham- °* chambord 
bord (shofi-bor') had no direct descendants. The inheritance would, 
therefore, upon his death, pass to the House of Orleans, represented 
by the Count of Paris. The elder branch would in the course of 
nature be succeeded by the younger. This fusion seemed accom- 
plished when the Count of Paris visited the; Count of Chambord, 
recognizing him as head of the family. A committee of nine members 
of the Assembly, representing the Monarchist parties, the Imperial- 
ists holding aloof, negotiated during the summer of 1873 with the 
" King" concerning the terms of restoration. The negotiations were 
successful on most points, and it seemed as if by the close of the 
year the existence of the Republic would be terminated and Henry 
V would be reigning in France. The Republic was saved by the 
devotion of the Count of Chambord to a symbol. He stated that 
he would never renounce the ancient Bourbon banner. "Henry V 
could never abandon the white flag of Henry IV," he had already 
declared, and from that resolution he never swerved. The tricolor 
represented the Revolution. If he was to be King of France it 
must be with his principles and his flag ; King of the Revolution he 



488 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

would never consent to be. The Orleanists, on the other hand, ad- 
hered to the tricolor, knowing its popularity with the people, knowing 
that no regime that repudiated the glorious symbol could long endure. 
Against this barrier the attempted fusion of the two branches of 
the Bourbon family was shattered. The immediate danger to the 
Republic was over. 

But the Monarchists did not renounce their hope of restoring 
the monarchy. The Count of Chambord might, perhaps, change 
his mind ; if not, as he had no son, the Count of Paris would 
lishment succeed him after his death as the lawful claimant to the 

of the throne ; and the Count of Paris, defender of the tricolor, could 

^^ ^ then be proclaimed. The Monarchists, therefore, planned 

merely to gain time. Marshal MacMahon had been chosen execu- 
tive, as had Thiers, for no definite term. He was to serve during 
the pleasure of the Assembly itself. Believing that MacMahon 
would resign as soon as the King really appeared, they voted that 
his term should be for seven years, expecting that a period of that 
length would see a clearing up of the situation, either the change 
of mind or the death of the Count of Chambord. Thus was estab- 
lished the Septennate, or seven-year term, of the President, which 
still exists. The presidency was thus given a fixe'd term by the 
Monarchists, as they supposed, in their own interests. If they could 
not restore the monarchy in 1873 they could at least control the 
presidency for a considerable period, and thus prepare an easy 
transition to the new system at the opportune moment. 

But France showed unmistakably that she desired the establish- 
ment of a definitive system, that she wished to be through with 
these provisional arrangements, which only kept party feeling 
feverish and handicapped France in her foreign relations. 
reiuctoMo France had as yet no constitution, and yet this Assembly, 
frame a con- choscn to make peace, had asserted that it was also chosen to 

stitution . . . , . , , . . , . . . 

frame a constitution, and it was by this assertion that it justi- 
fied its continuance in power long after peace was made. Yet month 
after month, and year after year, went by and the constitution was 
not made, nor even seriously discussed. If the Assembly could not, 
or would not, make a constitution, it should relinquish its power 
and let the people elect a body that would. But this it steadily 
refused to do. 

This inability of the Monarchists to act owing to their own internal 



CONSTITUTION OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC 489 

divisions was of advantage to only one party, the Republican. 
More and more people who had hitherto been Monarchists, now 
finally convinced that a restoration of the monarchy was im- ^ 
practicable, joined the Republican party, and thus it came Constitution 
about finally in 1875 that the Assembly decided to make the °^ '^'^^ 
constitution. It did not, as previous assemblies had done, draw up a 
single document, defining the organization, and narrating the rights 
of the citizens. It passed three separate laws which taken together 
were to serve as a constitution. By these laws a legislature was 
established consisting of two houses, a Senate, consisting of 300 
members, at least forty years of age and chosen for nine years, and a 
Chamber of Deputies, to be elected by universal suffrage for a term 
of four years. These two houses meeting together as a National 
Assembly elect the President of the Republic. There is no xhe 
vice-president, no succession provided by law. In case of a President 
vacancy in the presidency the National Assembly meets immediately, 
generally within forty-eight hours, and elects a new President. The 
President has the right to initiate legislation, as have the members 
of the two houses, the duty to promulgate all laws and to superintend 
their execution, the pardoning power, the direction of the army and 
navy, and the appointment to all civil and military positions. He 
may, with the consen of the Senate, dissolve the Chamber of Depu- 
ties before the expiration of its legal term and order a new election. 
But these powers are merely nominal, for the reason that every 
act of the President must be countersigned by a minister, who 
thereby becomes responsible for the act, the President being irre- 
sponsible, except in the case of high treason. 

The fundamental feature of the Third Republic, differentiating it 
greatly from two preceding republics of France and from the republic 
of the United States, is its adoption of the parliamentary ^ ^^ 
system as worked out in England. The President's position parliamentary 
resembles that of a constitutional monarch. All his acts must ^^^^ '*^ 
be countersigned by his ministers who become thereby responsible 
for them. The ministers in turn are responsible to the chambers, 
particularly to the Chamber of Deputies. The Chamber thus 
controls the executive, makes and unmakes ministries as it chooses. 
The legislature controls the executive. The legislative and executive 
branches are thus fused as in England, not sharply separated as in 
the United States. The essential feature, therefore, of this republic 



490 



FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 



The 

policy of 
MacMahon 



is that it has adopted the governmental machinery first elaborated 
in a monarchy. The Constitution of 1875 was a compromise between 
opposing forces, neither of which could win an unalloyed victory. 
The monarchical assembly that established the parliamentary 
republic in 1875 thought that it had introduced sufficient monarchical 
elements into it to curb the aggressiveness of democracy and to 
facilitate a restoration of the monarchy at some convenient season. 
The Senate, it thought, would be a monarchical stronghold and the 
President and Senate could probably 
keep the Chamber of Deputies in check 
by their power of dissolving it. 

It was some years before the Re- 
publicans secured unmistakable control 

of the Republic in all its branches. 

In the first elections under the 

new constitution, which were held 
at the beginning of 1876, the Monar- 
chists secured a slight majority in the 
Senate, the Republicans a large ma- 
jority in the Chamber of Deputies. It 
was generally supposed that the Presi- 
dent, MacMahon, was a Monarchist in 
his sympathies. This was shown to 
be the case when MacMahon in May, 
1877, dismissed the Simon ministry, 
which was Republican and which had 
the support of the Chamber, and appointed a new ministry, com- 
posed largely of Monarchists under the Duke of Broglie (bro-ly')- 
Thereupon, the Senate, representing the same views, consented to 
the dissolution of the Chamber of Deputies, and new elections were 
ordered. 

The Monarchists carried on a vigorous campaign against the 

Republicans. They were powerfully supported by the clerical 

The Republic P^^'^y'' which, ever since 1871, had been extremely active. 

The Republicans resented this intrusion of the Catholic party, 

and their opinion of it had been vividly expressed some time 
before by Gambetta in the phrase — "Clericalism, that is our enemy," 
meaning that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous 
opponent of the Republic. The struggle was embittered. The 




Marshal MacMahon 
From a photograph. 



and the 
Church 



VICTORY OF THE REPUBLICANS 



491 



Broglie ministry used every effort to influence the votes against 
Gambetta and the RepubUcans. The clergy took an active part 
in the campaign, supporting the Broglie candidates and preaching 
against the Republicans, conduct which in the end was to cost them 
dear. 

The Republicans were, however, overwhelming!)'' victorious. In 
the following year, 1878, they also gained control of the Senate, 

and in 1879 they 

, 1^1 , ,1 Republicans 

brought about the victorious 
resignation of Mac- "^ *^f 

elections 

Mahon. The Na- 
tional Assembly immedi- 
ately met and elected 
Jules Grevy president, a 
man whose devotion to 
Republican principles had 
been known to France for 
thirty years. For the first 
time since 1871 the Re- 
publicans controlled the 
Chamber of Deputies, the 
Senate, and the Presi- 
dency. Since that time 
the Republic has been 
entirely in the hands of 
the Republicans. 

The Republicans, now 
completely victorious, 

sought by construe- Republican 

five legislation to legislation 
consolidate the Republic. 
Two personalities stood out with particular prominence : Gambetta, 
as president of the Chamber of Deputies, and Jules Ferry, as member 
of several ministries and as twice prime minister. The legislation 
enacted during this period aimed to clinch the victor}^ over the 
Monarchists and Clericals by making the institutions of France 
thoroughly republican and secular. The seat of government was 
transferred from Versailles, where it had been since 1871, to Paris 
(1880), and July 14, the day of the storming of the Bastille, symbol 




Jules Grew 

From an engraving by Lalauze, after the painting 
by L. Bonnat. 



492 



FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 



National 
system of 
education 



of the triumph of the people over the monarchy, was declared the 
national holiday, and was celebrated for the first time in 1880 amid 
great enthusiasm. The right of citizens freely to hold public meet- 
ings as they might wish, and without any preliminary permission 
of the Government, was secured, as was also a practically unlimited 
freedom of the press (1881). Workingmen were permitted, for the 
first time, freely to form trades unions (1884). 

The Republicans were particularly solicitous about education. 
As universal suffrage was the basis of the state, it was considered 
fundamental that the 
voters should be intelli- 
gent. Education was 
regarded as the strongest bul- 
wark of the Republic. Several 
laws were passed, concerning 
all grades of education, but 
the most important were those 
concerning primary schools. 
A law of 1 88 1 made primary 
education gratuitous ; one of 
1882 made it compulsory be- 
tween the ages of six and 
thirteen, and later laws made 
it entirely secular. No re- 
ligious instruction is given in 
these schools. All teachers 
are appointed from the lait3^ 
This system of popular educa- 
tion is one of the great creative achievements of the Republic, 
and one of the most fruitful. 

Under the masterful influence of Jules Ferry, prime minister in 

1881, and again from 1883 to 1885, the Republic embarked upon 

France's ^^ aggressive colonial policy. She established a protectorate 

colonial over Tunis ; sent expeditions to Tonkin, to Madagascar ; 

founded the French Congo. This policy aroused bitter criticism 

from the beginning, and entailed large expenditures, but Ferry, 

regardless of growing opposition, forced it through, in the end to his 

own undoing. His motives in throwing France into these ventures 

were various. One reason was economic. France was feeling the 




Jules Ferry 



policy 



COLONIAL EXPANSION 



493 



rivalry of Germany and Italy, and Ferry believed that she must 
win new markets as compensation for those she was gradually losing. 
Again, France would gain in prestige abroad, and in her own feeling 
of contentment, if she turned her attention to empire-building and 
ceased to think morbidly of her losses in the German war. Her 
outlook would be broader. Moreover, she could not afford to be 
passive when other nations about her were reaching out for Africa 

and Asia. The era of im- 
perialism had begun. France 
must participate in the move- 
ment or be left hopelessly be- 
hind in the rivalry of nations. 
Under Ferry's resolute leader- 
ship the policy of expansion 
was carried out, and the 
colonial possessions of France 
were greatly increased, but 
owing to one or two slight re- 
verses, grossly magnified by 
his enemies, Ferry himself 
became unpopular and his 
notable ministry was over- 
thrown (1885). 

During the next few years 
the political situation was 
troubled and uncertain. Political 
There was no command- t"rmoii 
ing personality in politics to 
give elevation and sweep to 
men's ideas. Gambetta had 
died in 1882 at the age of 
forty-four and Ferry, the em- 
pire-builder, was most unjustly the victim of unpopularity from 
which he never recovered. Ministries succeeded each other rapidly. 
Politics seemed a game of office seeking, pettily personal, not an 
arena in which men of large ideas could live and act. The educa- 
tional and anti-clerical and colonial policies all aroused enmities. 
President Grevy even was forced to resign because of a scandal which 
did not compromise him personally, but did smirch his son-in-law. 




Sadi-Carnot 
From a photograph by London Stereoscopic Co. 



494 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

Carnot (kar-no'), a moderate Republican, was chosen to succeed 
him (December 3, 1887). 

This state of discontent and disillusionment created a real crisis 

for the Republic, as it encouraged its enemies to renewed activity. 

These elements now found a leader or a tool in General Boulanger 

(bo-loh-zha'), a dashing figure on horseback and an attractive 

speaker, who sought to use the popular discontent for his own 

Boulanger advancement. Made Minister of War in 1886, he showed 

^f w''**^*^'^ much activity, seeking the favor of the soldiers by improving- 

the conditions of life in the barracks, and by advocating the 

reduction of the required term of service. He controlled several 

newspapers, which began to insinuate that under his leadership 

France could take her revenge upon Germany by a successful war 

upon that country. He posed as the rescuer of the Republic, 

demanding a total revision of the Constitution. His program, as 

announced, was vague, but probably aimed at the diminution of 

the importance of Parliament, the conferring of great powers upon 

the President, and his election directly by the people, which he 

hoped would be favorable to himself. For three years his personality 

was a storm center. Discontented people of the most varied shades 

flocked to his support — Monarchists, Imperialists, Clericals, hoping 

to use him to overturn the Republic. These parties contributed 

money to the support of his campaign, which was ably managed 

with the view to focusing popular attention upon him. To show 

the popular enthusiasm Boulanger now became a candidate for 

Elected to Parliament in many districts where vacancies occurred. In 

Parliament f^yg nionths (1888) he was elected deput}^ six times. A seventh 

election in Paris itself, in January, 1889, resulted in a brilliant 

triumph. He was elected by over 80,000 majority. Would he 

dare take the final step and attempt to seize power, as two Bonapartes 

had done before him ? He did not have the requisite audacity to try. 

In the face of this imminent danger the Republicans ceased their 

dissensions and stood together. They assumed the offensive. The 

ministry summoned Boulanger to appear before the Senate, sitting 

as a High Court of Justice, to meet the charge of conspiring against 

His flight the safety of the state. His boldness vanished. He fled from 

from France (-^g country to Belgium. He was condemned by the court 

in his absence. His party fell to pieces, its leader proving so little 

valorous. Two years later he committed suicide. The Republic 



THE FRANCO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE 



495 



had weathered a serious crisis. It came out of it stronger rather 

than weaker. Its opponents were discredited. 

In 1892 a very important diplomatic achievement still further 

strengthened the Republic. An alliance was made with Russia 

which ended the long period of isolation in which France had The Dual 

been made to feel her powerlessness during the twenty years Alliance 

since the Franco- Prussian 
war. This Dual Alliance 
henceforth served as a coun- 
terweight to the Triple Alli- 
ance of Germany, Austria, 
and Italy, and satisfied the 
French people, as well as in- 
creased their sense of safety 
and their confidence in the 
future. 

In 1894 President Carnot 
was assassinated. Casimir- 
Perier was chosen to succeed 
him, but resigned after six 
months. Felix Faure was 
elected in his place, who, 
however, died in office in 
1899, having seen the 
strengthening of the alliance 
with Russia and the be- 
ginning of the Dreyfus case, 
Emile Loubet a scandal which eclipsed that 

of Boulanger and created a 

new crisis for the Republic. Faure was succeeded in the presidency 

by Emile Loubet (lo-ba')- 




THE DREYFUS CASE 

In October, 1894, Dreyfus (dra-fiis'), a Jewish officer in the army, 
was arrested amid circumstances of unusual secrecy, was Dreyfus 
brought before a court-martial and was condemned as guilty of condemned 

. and 

treason, of transmitting important documents to a foreign degraded 
power, presumably Germany. The trial was secret and the P"^^<='y 
condemnation rested on merely circumstantial evidence, involving 



496 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

the identity of handwriting, declared to be his. He was condemned 
to expulsion from the army and to imprisonment for life. In Jan- 
uary, 1895, he was publicly degraded in a most dramatic manner 
in the courtyard of the Military School, before a large detachment 
of the army. His stripes were torn from his uniform, his sword was 
broken. Throughout this agonizing scene he was defiant, asserted 
his innocence, and shouted " Vhe la France !" He was then deported 
A prisoner ^° ^ Small, barren, and unhealthy island off French Guiana, 
on Devil's in South America, appropriately called Devil's Island, and was 
there kept in solitary confinement. A life imprisonment 
under such conditions would probably not be long, though it would 
certainly be horrible. 

The friends of Dreyfus protested that a monstrous wrong had 

been done, but their protests passed unheeded. But in 1896 Colonel 

„ . . , Picquart, head of the detective bureau of the General Staff, 

Evidence of ^ ' ... . 

Dreyfus' discovered that the incriminating document was not in the 

innocence handwriting of Dreyfus but of a certain Major Esterhazy, 
who was shortly shown to be one of the most abandoned characters 
in the army. Picquart's superior officers were not grateful for his 
efforts, fearing apparently that the honor of the army would be 
smirched if the verdict of the court-martial was shown to be wrong. 
They, therefore, removed him from his position and appointed Colonel 
Henry in his place. 

In January, 1898, Emile Zola, the well-known novelist, published 
a letter of great boldness and brilliancy, in which he made most 
„ , . scathing charges against the judges of the court-martial, not 

reopen the Only for injustice but for dishonesty. Many men of repu- 
*^^^® tation in literature and scholarship joined in the discussion, 

on the side of Dreyfus. Zola hoped to force a reopening of the 
whole question. Instead he was himself condemned by a court to 
imprisonment and fine. Shortly Henry committed suicide, having 
been charged with forging one of the important documents in the 
case. His suicide was considered a confession of guilt. So greatly 
disturbed were the people by these scandalous events that public 
opinion forced the reopening of the whole case. Dreyfus, pre- 
maturely old as a result of fearful physical and mental suffering, was 
brought from Devil's Island and given a new trial before a court- 
martial at Rennes in August, 1899. 

This new trial was conducted in the midst of the most excited 



THE DREYFUS CASE 



497 



state of the public mind in France, and of intense interest abroad. 
Party passions were inflamed as they had not been in France since 
the Commune. The supporters of Dreyfus were denounced second trial 
frantically as slanderers of the honor of the army, the very °^ Dreyfus 
bulwark of the safety of the country, as traitors to France. 

At the Rennes tribunal, Dreyfus encountered the violent hostility 
of the high army officers, who had been his accusers five years before. 
These men were desperately resolved that he should again be found 
guilty. The trial was of an 
extraordinary character. It 
was the evident purpose of the 
judges not to allow the matter 
to be thoroughly probed. Tes- 
timony, which in England or 
America would have been con- 
sidered absolutely vital, was 
barred out. The universal 
opinion outside France was, 
as was stated in the London 
Times, "that the whole case 
against Captain Dreyfus, as 
set forth by the heads of the 
French army, in plain com- 
bination against him, was foul 
with forgeries, lies, contradic- 
tions, and puerilities, and that 
nothing to justify his con- 
demnation had been shown." 

Nevertheless, the court, by a vote of five to two, declared him 
guilty, "with extenuating circumstances," an amazing verdict. It is 
notgenerally held that treason to one's country can plead extenu- Again de- 
ating circumstances. The court condemned him to ten years' blared guilty 
imprisonment, from which the years spent at Devil's Island might 
be deducted. Thus the "honor" of the army had been maintained. 

President Loubet immediately pardoned Dreyfus, and he was 
released, broken in health. This solution was satisfactory to neither 
side. The anti-Dreyfusites vented their rage on Loubet. Pardoned by 
On the other hand, Dreyfus demanded exoneration, a recog- 
nition of his innocence, not pardon. 




Alfred Dreyfus 



Loubet 



498 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

But the Government was resolved that this discussion, which had 
so frightfully torn French society, should cease. Against the opposi- 
tion of the Dreyfusites, it passed, in 1900, an amnesty for all those 
implicated in the notorious case, which meant that no legal actions 
could be brought against any of the participants on either side. 
The friends of Dreyfus, Zola, and Picquart protested vigorously 
against the erection of a barrier against their vindication. The bill, 
nevertheless, passed. 

Six years later, however, the Dreyfus party attained its vindica- 
tion. The revision of the whole case was submitted to the Court 
Dreyfus of Cassation. On July 12, 1906, that body quashed the verdict 

vindicated Qf j-j^g Rennes court-martial. It declared that the charges 
which had been brought against Dreyfus had no foundation, and 
that the Rennes court-martial had been guilty of gross injustice in 
refusing to hear testimony that would have established the innocence 
of the accused. The case was not to be submitted to another military 
tribunal, but was closed. 
The Government now restored Captain Dreyfus to his rank in the 
army, or rather, gave him the rank of major, allowing him to 
restored to count to that end the whole time in which he had been unjustly 
rank in the deprived of his standing. On July 21, 1906, he was invested 
with a decoration of the Legion of Honor in the very court- 
yard of the Military School, where, eleven years before, he had- been 
so dramatically degraded. Colonel Picquart was promoted brig- 
adier-general, and shortly became Minister of War. Zola had died 
in 1903, but in 1908 his body was transferred to the Pantheon, as 
symbolizing a kind of civic canonization. Thus ended the "Affair." 
The Dreyfus case, originally simply involving the fate of an 
alleged traitor, had soon acquired a far greater significance. Party 
Th i nifi ^^*^ personal ambitions and interests sought to use it for pur- 
cance of poses of their own and thus the question of legal right and 

the case wrong was woefully distorted and obscured. Those.who hated 

the Jews used it to inflame people against that race, as Dreyfus was 
a Jew. The Clericals joined them. Monarchists seized the occa- 
sion to declare that the Republic was an egregious failure, breeding 
treason, and ought to be abolished. On the other hand, there rallied 
to the defense of Dreyfus those who believed in his innocence, those 
who denounced the hatred of a race as a relic of barbarism, those who 
believed that the military should be subordinate to the civil authority 



THE GROWTH OF RELIGIOUS ORDERS 499 

and should not regard itself as above the law as these army officers 
were doing, those who believed that the whole episode was merely 
a hidden and dangerous attack upon the Republic, and all who 
believed that the clergy should keep out of politics. 

The chief result of this memorable struggle in the domain of 
politics was to unite more closely Republicans of every shade in 
a common program, to make them resolve to reduce the political tion of the 
importance of the army and of the Church. The former was ^^P^^^'cans 
easily done by removals of monarchist officers. The attempt to solve 
the latter much more subtle and elusive problem led to the next great 
struggle in the recent history of France, the struggle with the Church. 

THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE 

This new controversy assumed prominence under the premiership 
of Waldeck- Rousseau, a leader of the Parisian bar, a former follower 
of Gambetta. In October, 1900, he made a speech at Toulouse ^^ 
which resounded throughout France. The real peril confront- of Church 
ing the country, he said, arose from the growing power of ^^ *^*® 
religious orders — orders of monks and nuns — and from the char- 
acter of the teaching given by them in the religious schools they 
were conducting. He pointed out that here was a power within the 
State which was a rival of the State and fundamentally hostile to 
the State. These orders, moreover, although not authorized under 
the laws of France, were growing rapidly in wealth and numbers. 
Between 1877 and 1900 the number of nun^ had increased 
from 14,000 to 75,000, in orders not authorized. The monks of The "^^"^ 
numbered about 190,000. The property of these orders, held religious 

1 r- I- y orders 

m mortmam, estimated at about 50,000,000 francs in the 
middle of the century, had risen to 700,000,000 in 1880, and was more 
than a billion francs in 1900. Here was a vast amount of wealth, 
withdrawn from ordinary processes of business, an economic danger 
of the first importance. But the most serious feature was the 
activity of these orders in teaching and preaching, for that teaching 
was declared to be hostile to the Republic and to the principles of 
liberty and equality on which the Republicans of France have in- 
sisted ever since the French Revolution. In other words, these 
church schools were doing their best to make their pupils hostile 
to the Republic and to republican ideals. Here was a danger to 



500 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

the State which Parliament must face. To preserve the Republic 
defensive measures must be taken. Holding this opinion, the 
The Law of Waldeck-Rousseau ministry secured the passage, July i, 1901, 
Associations Qf ^^g L^^ Qf Associations, which provided, among other 
things, that no religious orders should exist in France without defi- 
nite authorization in each case from Parliament. It was the belief 
of the authors of this bill that the Roman Catholic Church was the 
enemy of the Republic, that it was using its every agency against 
the Republic, that it had latterly supported the anti-Dreyfus party 
in its attempt to discredit the institutions of France, as it had done 
formerly under MacMahon. Gambetta had, at that time, declared 
that the enemy was the clerical party. "Clericalism," said Combes, 
who succeeded Waldeck-Rousseau in 1902, "is, in fact, to be found 
at the bottom of every agitation and every intrigue from which 
Republican France has suffered during the last thirty-five years." 

Animated with this feeling. Combes enforced the Associations 
Law with rigor in 1902 and 1903. Many orders refused to ask 
The Law ^o^" authorization from Parliament ; many which asked were 

enforced refused. Tens of thousands of monks and nuns were forced 

to leave their institutions, which were closed. By a law of 1904 it 
was provided that all teaching by religious orders, even by those 
authorized, should cease within ten years. The State was to have 
a monopoly of the education of the young, in the interest of the 
ideals of liberalism it represented. Combes, upon whom fell the 
execution of this law, suppressed about five hundred teaching, 
preaching, and commercial orders. This policy was vehemently 
denounced by Catholics as persecution, as an infringement upon 
liberty, the liberty to teach, the liberty of parents to have their 
children educated in denominational schools if they preferred. 

This, as events were to prove, was only preliminary to a far 
greater religious struggle, which ended in the complete separation 
of Church and State. 

The relations of the Roman Catholic Church and the State down 

to 1905 were determined by the Concordat, concluded between 

Napoleon I and Pius VII in 1801 and promulgated in the fol- 

Concordat lowing year. The system then established remained undis- 

of 1801 turbed throughout the nineteenth century, under the various 

regimes, but after the advent of the Third Republic there was 

ceaseless and increasing friction between the Church and the State. 



ABROGATION OF THE CONCORDAT 



501 



The opposition of the Repubhcans was augmented by the activity 
of the clergy in the Dreyfus affair. Consequently a law was finally 
passed, December 9, 1905, which abrogated the Concordat. The 
State was henceforth not to pay the salaries of the clergy ; on the 
other hand, it relinquished all rights over their appointment. It 



:.i-'>< '■)::■ - 't 




-^- Sit 




■'-,■' ■'■■' 




""■ 


f' '.■ 


■■ ^" 'f " 






ili'iITi ^ 


1! ■i« 


mm 


^gi^iiiii^iisi^m. 




^ 


^^^^-^iKiiS^Ti 


1 


:■'• ;) 


■ -•- 


lf"| 


1 


Siiils 


1 


' 11^ ■ 






. v-;-:! '';£: Jl 


mil 


1 

4'* 


^i^^ 


1 


:iKll 


1 


_j^,,,,.. 


n 'liiii J^vh,'i)ff 


Ht^""":^^^!!^.^^:!!^^ 


'■■'"J? ' 




i L - ) ^.-'t j'-j^if .sii". ^^^R^^ylpl^^ 


!iSiirP=? 


'■^.':.: 






^P^-^mi 


— .£-— -^ - '« 


mm 


»M 




f^^'^ta" 


%??;?Te l!»«K«-'SF»Stem.?!.a 




■;^'-;|;:-:"^^;-'J^f=^ 


"^fi'/jl ^ "^ 


y . ■ -VV 




! 


i>.«.L.Mi*^.i<.«»'-. ™._-a-:a 


^^■^HRB^n 


ib^' 


fi 




?L^^ ^^^^^^^ 


SP' 


^ri 


^^^^^^ 


^^^^^^^^^^"^^ 




^^^ 






m- 



Interior of the Chamber of Deputies 



undertook to pay pensions to clergymen who had served many years, 
and were already well advanced in age ; also to pay certain ., p^^^^^:^ _ 
amounts to those who had been in the priesthood for a few tions of 
years only. In regard to the property, which since 1789 had °^^ '^ 
been declared to be owned by the nation, the cathedrals, churches, 
chapels, it was provided that these should still be at the free dis- 
posal of the Roman Catholic Church, but that they should be held 
and managed by so-called "Associations of Worship," which were 
to vary in size according to the population of the community. 

This law was condemned unreservedly by the Pope, Pius X, who 
declared that the fundamental principle of separation of Church and 



502 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

State is "an absolutely false thesis, a very pernicious error," and 

who denounced the Associations of Worship as giving the adminis- 

PooePiusX trative control, not "to the divinely instituted hierarchy, 

rejects the but to an association of laymen." The Pope's decision was 

aw o 1905 f^nal and conclusive for all Catholics as it was based on 

fundamentals and flatly rejected the law of 1905. 

Parliament, therefore, passed a new law, early in 1907, supple- 
mentary to the law of 1905. By it most of the privileges guaranteed 
_. the Roman Catholic Church by the law of 190s were abro- 

The sup- -' ■' ^ 

piementary gated. The Critical point in the new law was the method of 
aw 1907 keeping the churches open for religious exercises and so avoiding 
all the appearance of persecution and all the scandal and uproar 
that would certainly result if the churches of France were closed. 
It was provided that their use should be gratuitous and should be 
regulated by contracts between the priests and the prefects or 
mayors. These contracts would safeguard the civil ownership of 
the buildings, but worship would go on in them as before. This 
system is at present in force. 

The result of this series of events and measures is that Church 
and State are now definitely separated. The people have ap- 
g . . parently approved in recent elections the policy followed by 
Church and their Government. Bishops and priests no longer receive 
^'^*^ salaries from the State. On the other hand, they have liber- 

ties which they did not enjoy under the Concordat, such as rights 
of assembly and freedom from government participation in appoint- 
ments. The faithful must henceforth support their priests and bear 
the expenses of the Church by private contributions. The church 
buildings, however, have been left to their use by the irrational but 
practical device just described. 



ACQUISITION OF COLONIES IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 

France, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, had pos- 
sessed an extensive colonial empire. This she had lost to England 
, ^ , as a result of the wars of the reign of Louis XV, the Revolution, 

The French . .,,■„, , , 

colonial and the Napoleonic period, and m 181 5 her possessions had 

empire shrunk to a few small points, Guadeloupe and Martinique in 

the West Indies, St. Pierre and Miquelon, off Newfoundland, five 

towns on the coast of India, of which Pondicherry was the best 



COLONIAL EXPANSION 503 

known ; Bourbon, now called Reunion, an island in the Indian Ocean ; 
Guiana in South America, which had few inhabitants, and Senegal 
in Africa. These were simply melancholy souvenirs of her once 
proud past, rags and tatters of a once imposing empire. 

In the nineteenth century she was destined to begin again, and 
to create an empire of vast geographical extent, only second in 
importance to that of Great Britain, though vastly inferior Building a 
to that. The interest in conquests revived but slowly after •^^'^ empire 
1815. France had conquered so much in Europe from 1792 to 1812 
only to lose it as she had lost her colonies, that conquest in any form 
seemed but a futile and costly display of misdirected enterprise. 
Nevertheless, in time the process began anew, and each of the various^ 
regimes which have succeeded one another since 1 8 1 5 has contributed 
to the building of the new empire. 

The beginning was made in Algeria, on the northern coast of 
Africa, directly opposite France, and reached now in less than 
twenty-four hours from Marseilles. Down to the opening of 
the nineteenth century, Algeria, Tunis, and Tripoli, nominall}^ parts 
of the Turkish Empire, were in reality independent and constituted 
the Barbary States, whose main business was piracy. But Europe 
was no longer disposed to see her wealth seized and her citizens 
enslaved until she paid their ransom. In 18 16 an English fleet 
bombarded Algiers, released no less than 3,000 Christian captives, 
and destroyed piracy. 

The French conquest of Algeria grew out of a gross insult admin- 
istered by the Dey to a French consul in 1830. France replied by 
sending a fleet to seize the capital, Algiers. She did not at that 
time intend the conquest of the whole country, but merely the 
punishment of an insolent Dey, but attacks being made upon her 
from time to time which she felt she must crush, she was led on, 
step by step, until she had everywhere established her power. All 
through the reign of Louis Philippe this process was going on. Its 
chief feature was an intermittent struggle of fourteen years with a 
native leader, Abd-el-Kader, who proclaimed and fought a Holy 
War against the intruder. In the end (1847) he was forced to 
surrender, and France had secured an important territory. 

Under Napoleon III, the beginning of conquest in another part 
of Africa was made. France had possessed,- since the time of 
Louis XIII and Richelieu (resh'-lo), one or two miserable ports on 



504 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

the western coast, St. Louis the most important. Under Napoleon 

III, the annexation of the Senegal valley was largely carried 

other African through by the efforts of the governor, Faidherbe, who later 

conquests distinguished himself in the Franco-German War. Under 

Napoleon III also, a beginning was made in another part of the 

world, in Asia. The persecution of Christian natives, and the 

murder of certain French missionaries gave Napoleon the pretext 

to attack the king of Annam, whose kingdom was in the peninsula 

^ ^. ^, • that juts out from southeastern Asia. After eight years of inter- 

Cocliin-China 

mittent fighting France acquired from the king the whole of 
Cochin-China (i 858-1 867), and also established a protectorate 
over the Kingdom of Cambodia, directly north. 

Thus, by 1870, France had staked out an empire of about 700,000 
square kilometers, containing a population of about six million. 

Under the present Republic the work of expansion and 
underThe" Consolidation has been carried much farther than under all 
Third Qf ^-^g preceding regimes. There have been extensive annexa- 

tions in northern Africa, western Africa, the Indian Ocean, 
and in Indo-China. 

In northern Africa, Tunis has passed under the control of France. 
This was one of the Barbary States, and was nominally a part of 
the Turkish Empire, with a Bey as sovereign. After establish- 
ing herself in Algeria, France desired to extend her influence 
eastward, over this neighboring state. But Italy, now united, 
began about 1870 to entertain a similar ambition. France, there- 
fore, under the ministry of Jules Ferry, an ardent believer in colonial 
expansion, sent troops into Tunis in 1881, which forced the Bey to 
accept a French protectorate over his state. The French have 
not annexed Tunis formally, but they control it absolutely through 
a Resident at the court of the Bey, whose advice the latter is prac- 
tically obliged to follow. 

In western Africa, France has made extensive annexations in the 
Senegal, Guinea, Dahomey, the Ivory Coast, and the region of the 
Western Niger, and north of the Congo. By occupying the oases in 

Africa ^^g Sahara she has established her claims to that vast but 

hitherto unproductive area. This process has covered many years 
of the present Republic. The result is the existence of French 
authority over most of northwest Africa, from Algeria on the Mediter- 
ranean, to the Congo River. This region south of Algeria is called 



COLONIAL ACQUISITIONS 



505 



Madagascar 



the French Soudan, and comprises an area seven or eight times 
as large as France, with a population of some fourteen millions, 
mainly blacks. There is some discussion of a Trans-Saharan railroad 
to bind these African possessions more closely together. 

In Asia, the Republic has imposed her protectorate over the 
Kingdom of Annam (1883) and has annexed Tonkin, taken from 
China after considerable fighting (1885). In the Indian Ocean, 
she has conquered Madagascar, an island larger than France 

herself, with a population of 
two and a half million. A pro- 
tectorate was imposed upon 
that country in 1895, after ten 
years of disturbance, but after 
quelling a rebellion that broke 
out the following year, the 
protectorate was abolished, 
and the island was made a 
French colony. 

Thus at the opening of the 
twentieth century, the colonial 
empire of France is eleven 
times larger than France itself, 
has an area of six million 
square kilometers, a popula- 
tion of about fifty millions, 
and a rapidly growing com- 
merce. Most of this empire 
is located in the tropics and 
is ill adapted to the settle- 
ment of Europeans. Algeria 
and Tunis, however, ofTer 
conditions favorable for such 
settlements. They constitute the most valuable French possessions. 
Algeria is not considered a colony, but an integral part of France. 
It is divided into three departments, each one of which sends one 
senator and two deputies to the chambers of the French Parliament. 
On March 30, 1912, France established a protectorate over Mo- 
rocco. For several j^ears the status of that country had been one 
of the contentious problems of international politics. France had 




TilEOl'IULK UeLCASSE 



5o6 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC 

desired to gain control of it in order to round out her empire in 
northwestern Africa. In 1904 she had made an agreement with Eng- 
land whereby a far-reaching diplomatic revolution in Europe 
was inaugurated. This was largely the work of Theophile 
Delcasse, Minister of Foreign Affairs for seven years, from 1898 
to 1905, one of the ablest statesmen the Third Republic has produced. 
Delcasse believed that France would be able to follow a more inde- 
pendent and self-respecting foreign policy, one freer from German 
domination and intimidation, if her relations with Italy and England, 
severely strained for many years, largely owing to colonial rivalries 
and jealousies, could be made cordial and friendly. This he was 
able to accomplish by arranging a treaty of commerce favorable to 
Italy and by promising Italy a free hand in Tripoli and receiving 
from her the assurance that she would do nothing to hamper French 
policy in Morocco, a country of special significance to France because 
of her possession of Algeria. 

More important was the reconciliation with England. The 
relations of these two neighbors had long been difficult and, at times, 
TheFashoda full of danger. Indeed, in 1898 they had stood upon the very 
the Entente brink of war when a French expedition under Marchand 
Cordiaie (mar-shan') had crossed Africa and had seized Fashoda 

(fa-sho'-da) on the Upper Nile in the sphere of influence which 
Great Britain considered emphatically hers. The Fashoda incident 
ended in the withdrawal of the French before the resolute attitude 
of England. The lesson of this incident was not lost upon either 
power, and six years later, on April 8, 1904, they signed an agreement 
which not only removed the sources of friction between them once 
for all, but which established what came to be known as the Entente 
Cordiaie, destined to great significance in the future. By this agree- 
ment France recognized England's special interests in Egypt and 
abandoned her long-standing demand that England should set a 
date for the cessation of her "occupation" of that country. On 
the other hand, England recognized the special interests of France 
in Morocco and promised not to impede their development. 

One power emphatically objected to the determination of 

cha^iienges the fate of an independent country by these two powers alone. 

the Entente Germany challenged this agreement and asserted that she 

must herself be consulted in such matters ; that her rivals had 

no right by themselves to preempt those regions of the world _which 



ACQUISITION OF MOROCCO 507 

might still be considered fields for European colonization or control. 
German interests must be considered quite as much as French or 
English. 

Germany's peremptory attitude precipitated an international 
crisis and led to the international Conference of Algeciras in p - . 

1906, which was, however, on the whole a victory for France, Algeciras, 
acknowledging the primacy of her interests in Morocco. As ^^° 
France proceeded to strengthen her position there in the succeeding 
years, Germany issued another challenge in 191 1 by sending a gun- 
boat to Agadir, thus creating another crisis, which for a time threat- 
ened a European war. In the end, however, Germany recognized 
the position of France, but only after the latter had ceded to her 
extensive territories in Kamerun and the French Congo. For 
several years, therefore, Morocco was a danger spot in international 
politics, exerting a disturbing influence upon the relations of European 
powers to each other, particularly those of France and Germany. 
Finally, however, the independence of Morocco disappeared and 
the country was practically incorporated in the colonial empire of 
France. 

REFERENCES 

The Founding of the Third Republic : Wright, The History of the Third 
French Republic, pp. 31-67; Fisher, The Republican Tradition in Europe, pp. 
280-301 ; Seignobos, The Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 187-207; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 91-113. 

The Government of France: Ogg, Governments of Europe, pp. 304-324; 
Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. I, pp. 1-68. 

Boulanger: Wright, pp. 93-103. 

Dreyfus Case: Wright, pp. 115-145, 162-163. 

Dual Alliance : Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, pp. 38-60. 

Colonial Policy of the Third Republic : Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. XII, pp. 128-133; Wright, pp. 77-92, 155-160, 168-175. 

Church and State in France :. Wright, pp. 141-156, 163-165; Gooch, 
History of Our Time (Home University Library), pp. 34-56; Cambridge Modern 
History, Vol. XII, pp. 114-122; Bodley, The Church in France, pp. 13-114; 
Galton, Church and State in France, pp. 201-268 ; Robinson and Beard, Readings 
in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 223-232. 

Political Evolution of France in the Nlneteenth Centuhy : Seignobos, 
pp. 221-227. 



CHAPTER XXV 
THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 

The Kingdom of Italy, as we have seen, was established in 1856 

and i860. Venetia was acquired in 1866, and Rome in 1870. In 
_. these cases, as in the preceding, the people were allowed to 

Kingdom of express their wishes by a vote, which, in both instances, was 
** ^ practically unanimous in favor of the annexation. 

The Constitution of the new kingdom was the old Constitution 

of Piedmont, slightly altered. It provided for a parliament of 
The two chambers, a Senate and a Chamber of Deputies. The full 

Constitution parliamentary system was introduced, ministers representing 

the will of the Lower Chamber. The first capital was Turin, then 

Florence in 1865, and finally Rome since 1871. 

THE KINGDOM AND THE PAPACY 

The most perplexing question confronting the new kingdom 
concerned its relations to the Papacy. The Italian Kingdom had 
Kin dom s^^^^^> ^y violence, the city of Rome, over which the Popes 
and the had ruled in uncontested right for a thousand years. Rome 

Papacy j^^^ ^j^-^ peculiarity over all other cities, that it was the capital 

of Catholics the world over. Any attempt to expel the Pope from 
the city or to subject him to the House of Savoy would everywhere 
arouse the faithful, already clamorous, and might cause an inter- 
vention in behalf of the restoration of the temporal power. There 
were henceforth to be two sovereigns, one temporal, one spiritual, 
within the same city. The situation was absolutely unique and 
extremely delicate. It was considered necessary to determine their 
relations before the government was transferred to Rome. It was 
impossible to reach any agreement with the Pope, as he refused to 
recognize the Kingdom of Italy, but spoke of Victor Emmanuel simply 
as the King of Sardinia, and would make no concessions in regard 

508 



RELATIONS OF CHURCH AND STATE IN ITALY 509 

to his own rights in Rome. Parliament, therefore, assumed to 
settle the matter alone and passed, May 13, 1871, the Law of Papal 
Guarantees, a remarkable act defining the relations of Church and 
State in Italy. 

The object of this law was to carry out Cavour's principle of a 
"free Church in a free State," to reassure Catholics that the 
new kingdom had no intention of controlling in any way 
the spiritual activities of the Pope, though taking from him Papal 
his temporal powers. Any attacks upon him are, by this ^"^'■^'^tees 
law, to be punished exactly as are similar attacks upon the 
King. He has his own diplomatic corps, and receives diplomatic 
representatives from other countries. Certain places are set apart 
as entirely under his sovereignty : the Vatican, the Lateran, Castel 
Gandolfo, and their gardens. Here no Italian ofificial may enter, 
in his ofificial capacity, for Italian law and administration stop 
outside these limits. In return for the income lost with the temporal 
power, the Pope is granted 3,225,000 francs a year by the Italian 
Kingdom. This law has been faithfully observed by the Italian gov- 
ernment, but it has never been accepted by the Pope, nor has the 
Kingdom of Italy been recognized by him. He considers himself 
the "prisoner of the Vatican," and since 1870 has not left it to go 
into the streets of Rome, as he would thereby be tacitly recognizing 
the existence of another ruler there, the "usurper." 

Another difficult problem for the Kingdom was its financial status. 
The debts of the former Italian states were assumed by it and 

The 

were large. The nation was also obliged to make large expen- financial 
ditures on the army and the navy, on fortifications, and on j|**"^ °* 
public works, particularly on the building of railways, which 
were essential to the economic prosperity of the country as well as 
conducive to the strengthening of the sense of common nationality. 
There were, for several years, large annual deficits, necessitating 
new .loans, which, of course, augmented the public debt. Heroically 
did successive ministers seek to make both ends meet, not shrinking 
from new and unpopular taxes, or from the seizure and sale of 
monastic lands. Success was finally achieved, and in 1879 the 
receipts exceeded the expenditures. 

In 1878 Victor Emmanuel II died and was buried in the Pantheon, 
one of the few ancient buildings of Rome. Over his tomb is the 
inscription, "To the Father of His Country." He was succeeded by 



5IO THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 

his son, Humbert I, then thirty-four years of age. A month later 
Pius IX died, and was succeeded by Leo XIII, at the time of his 
Death of t election sixty-eight years of age. But nothing was changed 
Victor " by this change of personalities. Each maintained the system 

Emmanuel u ^^ ^^^ predecessor. Leo XIII, Pope from 1878 to 1903, fol- 
lowing the precedent set by Pius IX, never recognized the Kingdom 
of Italy, nor did he ever leave the Vatican. He, too, considered 
himself a prisoner of the "robber king." 



ILLITERACY 

Another urgent problem confronting the new kingdom was that 
of the education of its citizens. This was most imperative if the 
masses of the people were to be fitted for the freer and more 
responsible life opened by the political- revolution. The pre- 
ceding governments had grossly neglected this duty. In 1861 over 
seventy-five per cent of the population of the kingdom were illiterate. 
In Naples and Sicily, the most backward in development of all the 
sections of Italy, the number of illiterates exceeded ninety per cent 
of the population ; and in Piedmont and Lombardy, the most 
advanced sections, one-third of the men and more than half of the 
women could neither read nor write. In 1877 a compulsory educa- 
tion law was finally passed, but it has not, owing to the expense, 
been practically enforced. Though Italy has done much during the 
last thirty years, much remains to be done. Illiteracy, though 
diminishing, is still widely prevalent. Recent statistics show that 
forty per cent of the recruits in the army are illiterate. 

THE SUFFRAGE 

In 1882 the suffrage was greatly extended. Hitherto limited to 

those who were twenty-five years of age or over and paid about 

Extension of eight dollars a year in direct taxes, it was now thrown open to all 

the suffrage Qygr twenty-one years of age, and the tax qualification was 

reduced by half ; also all men of twenty-one who had had a primary 

education were given the vote, whether they could meet the tax 

qualification or not. The result was that the number of voters was 

tripled at once, rising from about 600,000 to more than 2,000,000. 

In 191 2 Italy took a long step toward democracy bj^ making 



COLONIAL EXPANSION 511 

the suffrage almost universal for men, only denying the franchise 
to those younger than thirty who have neither performed 
their military service nor learned to read and write. Thus all extension 
men over twenty-one, even if illiterate, have the vote if they °^ ^^^ 
have served in the army. The number of voters was thus 
increased from somewhat over three million to more than eight and a 
half million. 

THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE 

In foreign affairs Italy made an important decision which in- 
fluenced her course down to 1914. In 1882 she entered into alli- 
ance with Germany, and with Austria, her former enemy, and ^ , 

-^ -^ Italy an ally 

in many respects still her rival. This made the famous Triple of Germany 
Alliance, which has dominated Europe most of the time *°*^ Austria 
since it was created. The reasons why Italy entered this combina- 
tion, highly unnatural for her, considering her ancient hatred of 
Austria, were various : pique at France for the seizure of Tunis, 
which Italy herself coveted, dread of French intervention in behalf of 
the Pope, and a desire to appear as one of the great powers of Europe. 
The result was that she was forced to spend larger sums upon her 
army, remodeled along Prussian lines, and upon her navy, thus dis- 
turbing her finances once more. 



ACQUISITION OF COLONIES 

Italy now embarked upon another expensive and hazardous 
enterprise, the acquisition of colonies, influenced in this direction 
by the prevalent fashion, and by a desire to rank among the .^^j .^ 
world powers. Shut out of Tunis, her natural field, by France, colonial 
she, in 1885, seized positions on the Red Sea, particularly the ^™ '*'°° 
port of IMassawa. Two years later she consequently found herself 
at war with Abyssinia. The minister who had inaugurated this 
movement, Depretis, died in 1887. He was succeeded by Crispi, 
who threw himself heartily into the colonial scheme, extended the 
claims of Italy in East Africa, and tried to play off one native leader 
against another. To the new colony he gave the name of Eritrea. 
At the same time an Italian protectorate was established over a 
region in eastern Africa called Somaliland. But all this involved 
long and expensive campaigns against the natives. Italy was 



512 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 

trying to play the role of a great power when her resources did not 

warrant it. 

The consequence of this aggressive and ambitious military, naval, 

and colonial policy was the creation anew of a deficit in the state's 
The outcome finances, which increased alarmingly. The deficits of four 
of Italy's years amounted to the enormous sum of over seventy-five 

military •,!• i ■ i • 

and colonial million dollars, which occasioned heavy new taxes and wide- 
pohcy spread discontent, which was put down ruthlessly by despotic 

methods. This policy of aggrandizement led to a war with Abys- 
sinia and to a disaster in 1896 in the battle of Adowa, so crushing as 
to end the political life of Crispi and to force Italy into more moderate 
courses. Popular discontent continued. Itscause was the wretched- 
ness of the people, which in turn was largely occasioned by the heavy 
taxation resulting from these unwise attempts to play an international 
role hopelessly out of proportion to the country's resources. In the 
south and center the movement took the form of "bread riots," but in 
the north it was distinctly revolutionary. " Down with the dynasty," 
was a cry heard there. All these movements were suppressed by the 
Government, but only after much bloodshed. They indicated wide- 
spread distress and dissatisfaction with existing conditions. 

In July, 1900, King Humbert was assassinated by an Italian 
anarchist, who went to Italy for that purpose from Paterson, New 
Jersey. Humbert was succeeded by his son Victor Emmanuel III, 
then in his thirty-first year. 

The new King had been carefully educated and soon showed that 
he was a man of intelligence, of energy, and of firmness of will. He 
Victor won the favor of his subjects by the simplicity of his mode of 

Emmanuel m \[(q^ ^y hjg evident sense of duty, and by his sincere interest in 
the welfare of the people, shown in many spontaneous and uncon- 
ventional ways. He became forthwith a more decisive factor in 
the government than his father had been. He was a democratic 
monarch, indifferent to display, laborious, vigorous. The opening 
decade of the twentieth century was characterized by a new spirit 
which, in a way, reflected the buoyancy, and hopefulness, and 
courage of the young King. But the causes for the new optimism 
were deeper than the mere change of rulers and lay in the growing 
prosperity of the nation, a prosperity which, despite appearances, 
had been for some years preparing and which was now witnessed 
on all sides. The worst was evidently over. 



THE REIGN OF VICTOR EMMANUEL III 513 

INDUSTRY AND EMIGRATION 

Italy was becoming an indutrial nation. Silk and cotton and 
chemical and iron manufactures were advancing rapidly. The 
merchant marine was being greatly increased. This trans- Expansion of 
formation into a great industrial state was not only possible industry and 
but was necessary, owing to her rapidly increasing population, 
which grew from 1870 to 1914 from about 25,000,000 to over 
35,000,000. The birth rate was higher than that of any other 
country of Europe. But during the same period the emigration 
from Italy was large and was steadily increasing. Official statistics 
show that, between 1876 and 1905, over eight million persons Problem of 
emigrated, of whom over four million went to various South emigration 
American countries, especially Argentina, and to the United States. 
Perhaps half of the total number have returned to their native land, 
for much of the emigration was of a temporary character. Emi- 
gration has increased greatly under the present reign, while the 
economic conditions of the country have begun to show improvement. 
This is explained by the fact that the industrial revival described 
above has not yet affected southern Italy and Sicily, whence the 
large proportion of the emigrants come. From those parts which 
have experienced that revival the emigration has not been large. 
Only by an extensive growth of industries can this emigration be 
stopped or at least rendered normal. Italy finds herself in the 
position in which Germany was for many years, losing hundreds of 
thousands of her citizens each year. With thp expansion of German 
industries the outgoing stream grew less until, in 1908, it practically 
ceased, owing to the fact that her mines and factories had so far 
developed as to give employment to all. 

This increasing population and this constant loss by emigration 
have served in recent years to concentrate Italian thought more 
and more upon the necessity of new and more advantageous colonies, 
that her surplus population may not be drained away to other 
countries. The desire for expansion has increased and with it the 
determination to use whatever opportunities are offered by the 
politics of Europe for that purpose. The result was the Acquisition of 
acquisition in 191 2 of the extensive territory of Tripoli and of Tripoli 
a dozen /Egean islands, spoils of a war with Turkey which will 
be more fully treated later. With this desire for expansion went 



514 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 

also a tendency to scrutinize more carefully the nature of her rela- 
tions with her allies, Germany and Austria. The advantages of the 
Triple Alliance became, in the minds of many, more and more 
doubtful. One obvious and positive disadvantage in an alliance 
with Austria was the necessary abandonment of a policy of 
Italia annexation of those territories north and northeast of Italy, 

Irredenta which are inhabited by Italians but which were not included 
within the boundaries of the kingdom at the time of its creation. 
These were the so-called Trentino, the region around the town of 
Trent ; Trieste, and Istria. These territories were subject to Austria, 
and as long as Italy was allied with Austria she was kept from any 
attempt to gain this Italia Irredenta or Unredeemed Italy, and thus 
so round out her boundaries as to include within them people who 
are Italian in race, in language, and, probably, in sympathy. 

On May 4, 19 15, Italy denounced her treaty of alliance with 

Austria. The famous Triple Alliance, which had been the dominant 

^ , , . factor in European diplomacy since 1882, thus came to an end. 

Italy breaks ' ' 

with Austria- On May 23, Italy declared war against Austria-Hungary and 
Hungary entered the European conflict on the side of the Entente 

Allies in the hope of realizing her "national aspirations." 

REFERENCES 

Italy Since 1870: Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 213-242; 
Gooch, History of Our Time, pp. 57-65 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe 
Since 1814, pp. 359-372- 

Government of Italy : Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental 
Europe, Vol. I, pp. 146-188; Ogg, Governments of Europe, pp. 362-390. 

History of Political Parties: Lowell, Vol. I, pp. 189-231; Ogg, pp. 
391-403. 

Present Conditions : King and Okey,/to/>' To-day; Underwood, United Italy. 



CHAPTER XXVI 

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

AUSTRIA TO THE COMPROMISE OF 1867 

Austria, perilously near dissolution in 1848, torn by revolutions 
in Bohemia, Hungary, the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom, with her 
influence in Germany temporarily paralyzed, had emerged 
triumphant from the storm and by 1850 was in a position to oppression of 
impose her will once more upon her motley group of states. ^^^ subjects 

o, 1 1 1 r , r r , - • 1 , , • , after 1849 

She learned no lesson from the fearful crisis through which 
she had passed but at once entered upon a course of reaction of 
the old familiar kind. Absolutism was everywhere restored. Italy 
was ruled with an iron hand, Prussia was humiliated in a most 
emphatic manner, Hungary felt the full weight of Austrian dis- 
pleasure. Hungary, indeed, was considered to have forfeited by her 
rebellion the old historic rights she had possessed for centuries. 
Her Diet was abolished, the kingdom was cut up into five sections, 
and each was ruled largely by Germans. Indeed the policy was to 
crush out all traces of separate nationality. Francis Joseph, how- 
ever, found it in the end impossible to break the spirit of Magyars* 
who bent beneath the autocrat but did not abdte their claims. 

For ten years this arbitrary and "despotic system continued. Then 
came the disaster in Italy in 1859, the defeats of Magenta and 
Solferino and the loss of Lombardy. One reason for the j. j, 
defeat was the attitude of the Hungarians, many of whom the war in 
joined the Italian armies against Austria. Moreover, it ^**'y "^ '^59 
seemed as if rebellion might break out at any moment in Hungary 
itself. 

AUSTRIA BECOMES A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY 

This time the Austrian government profited by experience. In 
order to gain the support of his various peoples Francis Joseph 
resolved to break with the previous policy of his reign, to sweep 

515 



5i6 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

away abuses, redress grievances, and introduce liberal reforms. But 
the problem was exceedingly complicated, and was only slowly 
Joseph re- Worked out after several experiments had been tried which 
verses his j^g^^ resulted in failure. The chief difficulty lay in the adjust- 
ment of the claims of the different races over which he ruled. 
In 1 86 1 the Emperor decided that there should be a Parliament for 
the whole Empire, divided into two chambers, meeting annually. 
The members of the House of Representatives were to be chosen by 
the local diets, on a basis of population. The local legislatures 
were to continue for local affairs, but with reduced powers. By this 
constitution, granted by the Emperor, Austria became a constitu- 
tional monarchy. Absolutism as a form of government was aban- 
doned. 

HUNGARY'S REFUSAL TO COOPERATE 

But this constitution was a failure, and chiefly because of the 
attitude of the Hungarians. To .the first Parliament Hungary 
declined to send representatives, an attitude she maintained steadily 
for several years until a new arrangement was made satisfactory to 
her. Why did she refuse to recognize a constitution that represented 
a great advance in liberalism over anything the Empire had known 
before? Why did she refuse to send representatives to a Parliament 
in which she would have weight in proportion to the number of her 
inhabitants? Why did she steadily refuse to accept an arrange- 
ment that seemed both liberal and fair ? 

It must be constantly remembered that Hungary consisted of 

several races, and that of these races the Magyars had always been the 

dominant one, though in a numerical minority. This dominant race 

was divided into two parties, one of irreconcilables, men who bitterly 

hated Austria, who would listen to no compromise with her, whose 

ideal was absolute independence. These men, however, were 

not in control. They were discredited by the failures of 1849. 

The leaders of Hungary were now the moderate liberals, at whose 

head stood Francis Deak, the wisest and most influential Hungarian 

statesman of the nineteenth century. These men were willing to 

R asons for compromise with Austria on the question of giving the requi- 

Hungary's site Strength to the government of the whole Empire to enable 

refusal -^ ^^ pl^y -^^ ^.-j^ ^^ ^ great European power, but they were 

absolutely firm in their opposition to the constitution just granted 



RESISTANCE OF HUNGARY 



517 



by Francis Joseph, and immovable in their determination to se- 
cure the legal rights of Hungar}'. Their reasons for opposing the 
new constitution, which promised so vast an improvement upon the 
old unprogressive absolutism that had reigned for centuries, for 
thwarting the Emperor, who was frankly disposed to enter the 
path of liberalism, are most important. 

They asserted that Hungary had always been a separate nation, 
united with Austria simply in the person of the monarch, who was 

king in Hungary as he xhe 

was emperor in his own Hungarians 
, ,., , assert their 

hereditary states ; that " historic 
he was king in Hungary "s^*^ " 
only after he had taken an 
oath to support the funda- 
mental laws of Hungary, and 
had been crowned in Hungary 
with the iron crown of St. 
Stephen; that these funda- 
mental laws and institutions 
were centuries old ; that they 
were still the law of the land ; 
that the new constitution was 
one "granted" by Francis 
Joseph, and, if granted, might 
be withdrawn ; that, what- 
ever its abstract merits were, 
it was unacceptable by reason 
of its origin ; that, moreover, 
its effect was to make Hun- 
gary a mere province of Austria ; that what was wanted was not a 
constitution, but the constitution of Hungary, which had, since 
1848, been illegally suspended. Francis Joseph must formally 
recognize the historic rights of Hungary. After that the Hungarians 
were willing to consider means of giving him powers sufficient to 
enable him to play the role of a great monarch in European affairs. 
But first and foremost Hungary was determined to preserve her his- 
toric personality and not to fuse herself at all with the other peoples 
subject to the House of Hapsburg who were in her opinion merely 
"foreigners." 




Francis Deak 



5i8 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

The Hungarians had their way. The new experiment of a single 
imperial Parliament finally broke down beneath the impact of their 
persistent refusal to accept it. For four years, from 1861 
to 1865, there was a deadlock, neither side yielding. Then 
came the Austrian defeats of 1866, Austria's expulsion from Ger- 
many and from Italy. It was necessary for the monarchy to in- 
crease its strength at home, now that its influence was so reduced 
elsewhere. 

THE DUAL MONARCHY 

Accordingly there was concluded in 1867 between Austria and 
Hungary a Compromise, or Ausgleich, as the Germans call it, which 
The Com- ^^^ ^^^ basis of the Empire down to the collapse of 191 8. This 
promise of created a curious kind of state, defying classification, and 
' absolutely unique. The Empire was henceforth to be called 

Austria-Hungary, and was to be a dual monarchy. Austria- Hungary 
consisted of two distinct, independent states, which stood in law 
upon a plane of complete equality. Each had its own capital, 
the one Vienna, the other Budapest. Both had the same ruler, 
who in Austria bore the title of Emperor, in Hungary that of King. 
Each had its own Parliament, its own ministry, its own adminis- 
tration. Each governed itself in all internal affairs absolutely with- 
out interference from the other. 

But the two were united not simply in the person of the monarch. 
They were united for certain affairs regarded as common to both. 
The dele- There was a joint ministry composed of three departments : 
gations Foreign Affairs, War, and Finance. Each state had its own 

Parliament, but there was no parliament in common. In order then to 
have a body that should supervise the work of the three joint ministries 
there was established the system of "delegations." Each Parlia- 
ment chose a delegation of sixty of its members. These delegations 
met alternately in Vienna and Budapest. They were really com- 
mittees of the two Parliaments. They sat and debated separately, 
each using its own language, and they communicated with each other 
in writing. If after three communications no decision had been 
reached a joint session was held in which the question was settled with- 
out debate by a mere majority vote. 

Other affairs, which in most countries are considered common to 
all parts, such as tariff and currency systems, did not fall within the 



THE DUAL MONARCHY 519 

competence of the joint ministry or the delegations. They were to be 
regulated by agreements concluded between the two Parliaments for 
periods of ten years, exactly as between any two independent states, 
an awkward arrangement creating an intense strain every decade, 
for the securing of these agreements has been most difficult. 

Each state had its own constitution, each had its own Parliament, 
consisting of two chambers. In neither was there in 1867 universal 
suffrage. A demand for this was repeatedly made in both coun- 
tries with results that will appear later. 

Neither of the two states, thus recognized as forming the Dual 
Monarchy, had a homogeneous population. In each there was a 
dominant race, the Germans in Austria, the Magyars in Hun- 
gary. The Compromise of 1 867 was satisfactory to these alone, possessed a ^ 
In each country there were subordinate and rival races, jealous homogeneous 

r 1 r ^ ■ r ■ ■ -, r POpulation 

of the supremacy of these two, anxious for recognition and for 
power, and rendered more insistent by the sight of the remarkable suc- 
cess of the Magyars in asserting their individuality. In Hungary there 
were Croatia, Slavonia, and Transylvania ; in Austria there were seven- 
teen provinces, each with its own Diet, representing almost always a 
variety of races. Some of these, notably Bohemia, had in former cen- 
turies had a separate statehood, which they wished to recover ; others 
were gaining an increasing self-consciousness, and desired a future con- 
trolled by themselves and in their own interests. 

The struggles of these races were destined to form the most im- 
portant feature of Austrian history during the next fifty years. 
It should be noted that the principle of nationality, so effective 
in bringing about the unification of Italy and. Germany, has resuftsof 
tended in Austria in precisely the opposite direction, the split- principle of 

r 1 . ^ ,. , ,. , , nationality 

ting up of a single state into many. Dualism was established 
in 1867, but these subordinate races refused to acquiesce in it as a 
final form, as dualism favored only two races, the Germans and the 
Magyars. They wished to change the dual into a federal state, 
which should give free play to the several nationalities. The funda- 
mental conflict during the subsequent period was between these two 
principles — dualisni and federalism. These racial and nationalistic 
struggles have been most confusing. In the interest of clearness, 
only a few of the more important can be treated here. 

The Empire of Austria and the Kingdom of Hungary, having 
had different histories since 1867, may best be treated separately. 



520 . AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

THE EMPIRE OF AUSTRIA AFTER 1867 

No sooner had Austria made the Compromise with Hungary 
than she was confronted with the demand that she proceed further 
in the path thus entered upon. Various nationahties, or would-be 
nationahties, demanded that they should now receive as liberal 
treatment as Hungary had received in the Compromise of 1867. 
The claims The leaders in this movement were the Czechs of Bohemia, who, 
of Bohemia i^ 1868, definitely stated their position, which was precisely 
that of the Hungarians before 1867. They claimed that Bohemia 
was an historic and independent nation, united with the other states 
under the House of Hapsburg only in the person of the monarch. 
They demanded that the Kingdom of Bohemia should be restored, 
that Francis Joseph should be crowned in Prague with the crown 
of Wenceslaus. The agitation grew to such an extent that the 
Emperor decided to yield to the Bohemians. On September 14, 
1 87 1, he formally recognized the historic rights of the Kingdom of 
Bohemia, and agreed to be crowned king in Prague, as he had been 
crowned king in Budapest. Arrangements were to be made whereby 
Bohemia should gain the same rights as Hungary, independence in 
domestic affairs and union with Austria and Hungary for certain 
general purposes. The dual monarchy was about to become a 
triple monarchy. 

But these promises were not destined to be carried out. The 
Emperor's plans were bitterly opposed by the Germans of Austria, 
who, as the dominant class and as also a minority of the whole 
Em%ror's population, the Slavs being in the majority, feared the loss of 
plans their supremacy, feared the rise of the Slavs, whom they 

by'the hated. They were bitterly opposed, also, by the Magyars 

Germans and Qf Hungary, who declared that this was undoing the Com- 

Magyars o j ' » 

promise of 1867, and who feared particularly that the rise 
of the Slavic state of Bohemia would rouse the Slavic peoples 
of Hungary to demand the same rights, and the Magyars were 
determined not to share with them their privileged position. The 
opposition to the Emperor's plans was consequently most emphatic 
and formidable. It was also pointed out that the management of 
foreign affairs would be much more difficult with three nations direct- 
ing rather than with two. The Emperor yielded to the opposition. 
The decree that was to place Bohemia on an equality with Austria 



RACIAL STRUGGLES IN BOHEMIA 521 

and Hungary never came. Dualism had triumphed over federahsm, 
to the immense indignation of those who saw the prize snatched 
from them. The Compromise of 1867 remained unchanged. The 
House of Hapsburg continued to rule over a dual, not over a federal 
state. 

The racial problem, however, could not be conjured away so 
easily. It still persisted. For several years after this triumph the 
German element controlled the Austrian Parliament. But, _, 

' The persist- 

breaking up finally into three groups and incurring the ani- ent racial 
mosity of the Emperor by constantly blocking some of the ^'^° *" 
measures he desired, the Emperor threw his influence against them. 
There ensued a ministry which lasted longer than any other ministry 
has lasted and whose policies were in some respects of much sig- 
nificance. This was the Taaffe ministry which was in office .^j^^ xaaffe 
fourteen years, from 1879 to 1893. Its policies favored the ministry 
development of the Czechs and the Poles, two branches of the ^^~^ '^ 
Slavic race. The two races of Bohemia are the Germans and the 
Czechs. The latter were favored in various ways by the Taaffe 
ministry, which was angry with the Germans. They se- concessions 
cured an electoral law which assured them a majority in the *° Bohemia 
Bohemian Diet and in the Bohemian delegation to the Reichsrath 
or Austrian Parliament ; they obtained a university, by the division 
into two institutions of that of Prague, the oldest German university, 
founded in 1356. Thus there was a German University of Prague 
and a Czech University (1882). By various ordinances German 
was dethroned from its position as sole official language. After 
1886 officeholders were required to answer the demands of the public 
in the language in which they were presented, either German 
or Czech. This rule operated unfavorably for German officials, 
who were usually unable to speak Czech, whereas the Czechs, as a 
rule, spoke both languages. 

In Galicia the Poles, though a minority, obtained control of the 
Diet, supported by the Taaffe ministry, and proceeded to xhe Slavs 
oppress the Ruthenians, who, while Slavs, like the Poles favored 
themselves, belonged to the Little Russian or Ukrainian branch of 
that race ; in Carniola the Slovenes proceeded to Slavicize the 
province. Thus the Slavs were favored during the long ministry 
of Taaffe, an4 the evolution of the Slavic nationalities and peoples 
progressed at the expense of the Germans. This was the most striking 



522 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

difference between the recent development of Austria and the recent 
development of Hungary. In Austria the German domination of 
the Slavs largely broke down and was not persisted in, but racial 
hatreds continued, particularly between the Czechs and Germans 
of Bohemia. The Slavic peoples, in Austria, had some chances 
to develop. Racial tyranny, on the other hand, became, as we 
shall see, the settled policy of the dominant race of Hungary. The 
result was that racial tension, though by no means absent from 
Austria, was for a while considerably relieved, whereas in Hungary 
it steadily increased until it quite reached the snapping point. 

A movement toward democracy also went on under the Taaffe 
ministry and continued after its fall. The agitation for universal 
Universal Suffrage was finally successful. By the law of January 26, 
suffrage 1907, all men in Austria over twenty-four years of age were 

in ustna given the right to vote. The most noteworthy result of the 
first elections on this popular basis (May, 1907), was the return 
of 87 Socialists, who polled over a million votes, nearly a third of 
those cast. This party had previously had only about a dozen 
representatives. It was noticed at the same elections that the racial 
parties lost heavily. Whether this meant that the period of ex- 
treme racial rivalry was over and the struggle of social classes 
was to succeed it, remained to be seen. 



THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY AFTER 1867 

• 
Hungary, a country larger than Austria, larger than Great Britam, 

found her historic individuality definitely recognized and guaranteed 

Hungar a ^^ ^^^ Compromise of 1867. She had successfully resisted all 

separate attempts to merge her with the other countries subject to the 

ing om House of Hapsburg. She was an independent kingdom under 

the crown of St. Stephen. The sole official language was Magyar, 

which was neither Slavic nor Teutonic, but Turanian in origin. 

The political history of Hungary since the Compromise has been 

Race and Hiuch more simple than that of Austria. Race and language 

language questions have been fundamental, but they have been de- 

questions cided in a summary manner. The ruling race in 1867 was the 

Magyar, and it remained the ruling race. Though numerically 

in the minority in 1867, comprising only about six millions out of 

fifteen millions, it was a strong race, accustomed to rule and deter- 



RACIAL STRUGGLES IN HUNGARY 523 

mined to rule. This minority was steadily, after 1 867, attempting the 
impossible — the assimilation of the majority. There were four 
leading races in Hungary — the Magyar, the Slav, the Roumanian, 
the German. The Roumanians were the oldest, calling themselves 
Latins and claiming descent from Roman colonists of ancient times. 
They lived particularly in the eastern part of the kingdom, which is 
called Transylvania. They do not constitute a solid block of peoples, 
for there were among them many German or Saxon settlements, and 
between them and the independent Kingdom of Roumania, in- 
habited by people of the same race, were many Magyars. The Slavs 
of Hungary fell into separate groups. In the northern part of 
Hungary were the Slovaks, of the same race and language as the 
Czechs of Bohemia. In the southern and particularly the south- 
western part, were Serbs and Croatians, related to the Serbs of the 
Kingdom of Serbia. Of these the Croatians were the only ones 
who had a separate and distinct personality. They had never xhe 
been entirely absorbed in Hungary, they had had their own his- Croatians 
tory, and their own institutions. In 1868 the Magyars made a 
compromise with Croatia, similar to the compromise they had them- 
selves concluded with Austria in the year preceding. In regard 
to all the other races, however, the Magyars resolved to Magyarize 
them early and thoroughly. This policy they steadily per- 
sisted in. They insisted upon the use of the Magyar seek f/^^*^^ 
language in public offices, courts, schools, and in the railway Magyarize 

• , . / ■ -, , T • , other races 

service — wherever, m fact, it was possible. It is stated 
that there was not a single inscription in any post-office or railway 
station in all Hungary except in the Magyar language. The Mag- 
yars, in fact, refused to make any concessions to the various 
peoples who lived with them within the boundaries of Hungary, 
They, indeed, tried in every way to stamp* out all peculiarities. 
For nearly fifty years this policy was carried out and it did not 
succeed. Hungary was not Magyarized because the power of The Slavs 
resistance of Slovaks, Croatians, Slavonians, Roumanians ■■^^*^* 
proved too strong. But in the attempt, which grew sharper and 
shriller than ever in the last decade, the Magyar minority stopped 
at nothing. It committed innumerable tricks, acts of arbitrary 
power, breaches of the law, in order to crush out all opposition. 
Political institutions were distorted into engines of ruthless oppres- 
sion, political life steadily deteriorated in character and purpose, 



524 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

under the influence of this overmastering purpose which recognized no 
bounds. Hungary, which boasted itself a land of freedom, insured 
freedom only to the dominant race, the Magyars. But for the other 
races Hungary was a land of unbridled despotism. Every imaginable 
instrument was used to crush the Slavs or convert them into Magyars 
— corruption and gross illegalities in the administrative service, 
in the control of elections, persecution of all independent news- 

The Magyar . r \ ^ i /- , • • 

regime one of papers, suppression of schools, the firm determmation to 
ruthless prevent these subject peoples, for that they virtually were 

oppression "^ j r- r- > j j 

though theoretically fellow-citizens, from developing their 
own languages, literatures, arts, economic life, ideals. The situation 
was galling to the Slavs and other peoples. Magyar misrule 
steadily increased in intensity, seriously vitiated and corrupted 
the national life and made Hungary a tinder box, where disaffec- 
tion was bound to blaze up at the first opportune moment. It 
was an odious history of oppression. Had the Magyars recognized 
that the other races living within Hungary had the same rights 
as they, had they adopted a policy of fair play and justice, instead 
of amalgamation by force, Hungary might have been in a healthy 
condition. Hungary was not Magyarized. But racial animosities 
were raised to the highest pitch and the time of reckoning came with 
the Great War. Any detailed study of the relations of the dominant 
Magyars with the Croatians, the Serbs, the Slovaks, the Roumanians 
would amply prove the statements made. 

The reply to these assertions, constantly given by the apologists 
of the Magyars, is that Hungarian law expressly and carefully 
The Law of recognized t"he absolute equality of all the various elements 
1868 a dead and they point to the Law of 1868, which guaranteed the 
"Equal Rights of Nationalities." This law was admirable and 
enlightened and was composed in the finely liberal spirit of Francis 
Deak, who indeed was its chief author. But this law was a dead letter, 
and it had \)een a dead letter almost from the time of its passage. 
It was not repealed, as the advantage of having so liberal an 
enactment to point to for the purpose of silencing critics and throw- 
ing dust in foreign eyes was apparent to the Magyar tyrants. 
But the spirit of Francis Deak long ago passed out of the governing 
circles of Hungary. 

That many Roumanians in Transylvania desired separation from 
Hungary and incorporation in the Kingdom of Roumania, that many 



THE POLICY OF THE MAGYARS 525 

of the Serbs or Slavs of southern Hungary desired annexation to the 
Kingdom of Serbia, need occasion no surprise. Had the Slavs of 
Hungary received justice, which they never did receive, they 
would not have become an element of danger to the state. There 
is no evidence even yet to show that the Magyars have learned this 
lesson. 

DEMAND FOR HUNGARIAN INDEPENDENCE 

Toward the close of the nineteenth century there grew up among 
the Magyars themselves a new party, which still further complicated 
an already complex situation. It was called the Independence 
Party and was under the leadership of Francis Kossuth, son of pendence 
Louis Kossuth of 1848. This party was opposed to the Com- '^^''^ 
promise of 1867, and wished to have Hungary more independent 
than she was. It demanded that Hungary should have her own 
diplomatic corps, control her relations with foreign countries inde- 
pendently of Austria, and possess the right to have her own tariff. 
Particularly did it demand the use of Magyar in the Hungarian 
part of the army of the dual monarchy — a demand pressed language 
passionately, but always resisted with unshaken firmness by i"^^*'°° 
the Emperor, Francis Joseph, who considered that the safety of the 
state was dependent upon having one language in use in the army, 
that there might not be confusion and disaster on the battlefield. 
Scenes of great violence arose over this question, both in Parliament 
and outside of it, but the Emperor would not yield. Government 
was brought to a deadlock, and, indeed, for several years the Aus- 
gleich could not be removed, save by the arbitrary act of the Emperor, 
for a year at a time. Francis Joseph finally threatened, if forced 
to concede the recognition of the Hungarian language, to couple 
with it the introduction of universal suffrage into Hungary, for which 
there was a growing popular demand. This the Magyars did not 
wish, fearing that it would rob them of their dominant position by 
giving a powerful weapon to the politically inferior but more numer- 
ous races, and that they would, therefore, ultimately be submerged 
by the Slavs about them. In 1914 less than twenty-five per cent 
of the adult male population of Hungary possessed the vote. The 
normal operation of political institutions had for some time been 
seriously interrupted by the violent character of the discussions 
arising out of these extreme demands for racial monopoly and 



526 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 

national independence. Parliamentary freedom had practically 
disappeared and at the outbreak of the war Hungary was being 
ruled quite despotically. 

The House of Hapsburg lost during the nineteenth century the 
rich Lombardo- Venetian kingdom (i 859-1 866). It gained, however, 
Territorial Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a result of the Russo-Turkish 
losses and War of 1 877 these Turkish provinces were handed over by the 
gams Congress of Berlin of 1878 to Austria-Hungary to "occupy" 

and "administer." The Magyars at the time opposed the assump- 
tion of these provinces, wishing no more Slavs within the monarchy, 
but despite their opposition they were taken over, so strongly was 
the Emperor in favor of it. This acquisition of these Balkan coun- 
tries rendered Austria-Hungary a more important and aggressive 
factor in all Balkan politics, and in the discussions of the so-called 
Eastern Question, the future of European Turkey. In October, 
1908, Austria-Hungary declared these provinces formally annexed. 
The great significance of this act will be discussed later in connection 
with the very recent history of southeastern Europe and the causes 
of the European War. 

On November 21, 19 16, Francis Joseph died after a reign of nearly 
sixty-eight years. He was succeeded by his grand-nephew, who 
assumed the title of Charles I. 

REFERENCES 

Governments of Austria-Hxjngary : Lowell, Governments and Parties in 
Continental Europe, Vol. II, pp. 70-94, 137-152, 162-179; Oggi Governments of 
Europe, pp. 453-516. 

Political and Constitutional Development: Lowell, Vol. II, pp. 95- 
136, 153-161 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 518-553; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 174-212. 



CHAPTER XXVII 
ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

We have already traced the history of England down to the 
Reform Bill of 1867/ that is, during the first half of the famous 
Victorian era. We have seen that it was a period of numerous and 
important changes in the national life. Parliament had been made 
more representative of the people, the suffrage had been greatly 
extended, and much economic legislation had been passed, designed 
to improve the condition of the laboring classes. 

There is little doubt that the Conservatives expected to be rewarded 
for passing the Reform Bill of 1867, as the Liberals had been for 
passing that of 1832, thought, that is, that the newly enfranchised 
would, out of gratitude, continue them in office. If so, they were 
destined to a great disappointment, for the elections of 1 868 resulted 
in giving the Liberals a majority of a hundred and twenty in the 
House of Commons. Gladstone became the head of what was to 
prove a very notable ministry. 

GLADSTONE'S FIRST MINISTRY 

Gladstone possessed a more commanding majority than any prime 
minister had had since 1832. As the enlargement of the franchise in 
1 832 had been succeeded by a period of bold and sweeping xhe Great 
reforms, so was that of 1867 to be. Gladstone was a perfect Ministry 
representative of the prevailing national mood. The recent cam- 
paign had shown that the people were ready for a period of reform, of 
important constructive legislation. Supported by such a majority, 
and by a public opinion so vigorous and enthusiastic, Gladstone stood 
forth master of the situation. No statesman could hope to have 
more favorable conditions attend his entrance into power. He was 
the head of a strong, united, and resolute party and several men 
of great ability were members of his cabinet. 

1 See Chapter XV. 

527 



528 



ENGLAND SINCE 1868 



William 
Ewart 
Gladstone 
1809-1898 



Entrance 

into 

Parliament 



The man who thus became prime minister at the age of fifty-nine 
was one of the notable figures of modern Enghsh history. His 
parents were Scotch. His father had hewed out his own career, 
and from small beginnings had, by energy and talent, made himself 
one of the wealthiest and most influential men in Liverpool, and had 

been elected a member of Parliament. Young \\'illiam Ewart 

Gladstone re- 

ceived " the 

best education 
then going" at Eton 
College and Oxford 
University, in both 
of which institutions 
he stood out among 
his fellows. At Eton 
his most intimate 
friend was Arthur 
Hallam, the man 
whose splendid eu- 
logy is Tennyson's 
In Memoriam. His* 
career at Oxford was 
crowned by brilliant 
scholarly successes, 
and here he also dis- 
tinguished himself as 
a speaker in the 
Union, the university 
debating club. Be- 
fore leaving the uni- 
versity his thought 
and inclination were 
to take orders in the 
church, but his father 
was opposed to this and the son yielded. In 1833 he took his 

seat in the House of Commons as representative for one of 

the rotten boroughs which the Reform Bill of the previous 

year had not abolished. He was to be a member of that 
body for over sixty years, and for more than half that time its 




William E. Gladstone 

From engraving by T. O. Barlow, after the painting by 
J. E. Millais. 



THE COMPLEX PROBLEM OF IRELAND 529 

leading member. Before attaining the premiership, therefore, in 
1866, he had had a long political career and a varied training, had 
held many offices, culminating in the Chancellorship of the Exchequer 
and the leadership of the House of Commons. Beginning as a 
Conservative (Macaulay called him in 1838 the "rising hope of the 
Stem and unbending Tories"), he came under the influence of Sir 
kobert Peel, a man who, conservative by instinct, was gifted with 

fmusual prescience and adaptability, and who possessed the courage 
equired to be inconsistent, the wisdom to change as the world 
changed. Gladstone had, after a long period of transition, landed 
in the opposite camp, and was now the leader of the Liberal 
Party. By reason of his business ability, shown in the manage- Leader of 
ment of the nation's finances, his knowledge of parliamentary party 
history and procedure, his moral fervor, his elevation of tone, 
his intrepidity and courage, his reforming spirit, and his remarkable 
eloquence, he was eminently qualified for leadership. When almost 
sixty he became prime minister, a position he was destined to fill 
four times, displaying marvelous intellectual and physical 
energy. His administration, lasting from 1868 to 1874, is called pkst^ 

the Great Ministry. The key to his policy is found in his Ministry, 
f ■ 1 1 1 r , ^ 1868-1874 

remark to a friend when the summons came from the Queen 

for him to form a ministry: "My mission is to pacify Ireland." 

The Irish question, in fact, was to be the most absorbing interest 

of Mr. Gladstone's later political career, dominating all four of his 

ministries. It has been a very lively and at times a decisive factor 

in English politics for the last fifty years. 



IRELAND'S GRIEVANCES 

To understand this question, a brief survey of Irish history in the 
nineteenth century is necessary. Ireland was all through the century 
the most discontented and wretched part of the British Empire, 
While England constantly grew in numbers and wealth, Ireland 
decreased in population, and her misery increased. Ireland was 
inhabited by two peoples, the native Irish, who were Catholics, and 
settlers from England and Scotland, who were for the most part 
Anglicans or Presbyterians. The latter were a small but powerful 
minority. 

The fundamental cause of the Irish question lay in the fact that 



530 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

Ireland was a conquered country, that the Irish were a subject race. 
As early as the twelfth century the English began to invade the 
Ireland a island. Attempts made by the Irish at .various times during 
conquered six hundred years to repel and drive out the invaders only re- 
country suited in rendering their subjection more complete and more 
galling. Irish insurrections have been pitilessly punished, and race 
hatred has been the consuming emotion in Ireland for centuries. 
The contest has been unequal, owing to the far greater resources of 
England during all this time. The result of this turbulent history 
was that the Irish were a subject people in their own land, as they 
had been for centuries, and that there were several evidences of 
this so conspicuous and so burdensome that most Irishmen could 
not pass a day without feeling the bitterness of their situation. It 
was a hate-laden atmosphere which they breathed. 

The marks of subjection were various. The Irish did not own the 
land of Ireland, which had once belonged to their ancestors. The 
The agrarian various conqucsts by English rulers had been followed by ex- 
question tensive confiscations of the land. Particularly extensive was 
that of Cromwell. These lands were given in large estates to English- 
men. The Irish were mere tenants, and most of them tenants-at- 
will, on lands that now belonged to others. The Irish have always 
regarded themselves as the rightful owners of the soil of Ireland, have 
regarded the English landlords as usurpers, and have desired to re- 
cover possession for themselves. Hence there has arisen the agrarian 
question, a part of the general Irish problem. 

Again, the Irish had long been the victims of religious intolerance. 

At the time of the Reformation they remained Catholic, while the 

English separated from Rome. Attempts to force the Anglican 

Church upon them only stiffened their opposition. Neverthe- 

reiigious less, at the opening of the nineteenth century they were paying 

question tithes to the Anglican Church in Ireland, though they were 

themselves ardent Catholics, never entered a Protestant church, and 

were supporting their own churches by voluntary gifts. Thus they 

contributed to two churches, one alien, which they hated, and one 

to which they were devoted. Thus a part of the Irish problem was 

the religious question. 

Again, the Irish did not make the laws which governed them. In 

1800 their separate Parliament in Dublin was abolished, and from 

1 80 1 there was only one Parliament in Great Britain, that in London. 



CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION 531 

While Ireland henceforth had its quota of representatives in the 
House of Commons, it was always a hopeless minority. Moreover, 
the Irish members did not really represent the large majority ,^^^ 
of the Irish, as no Catholic could sit in the House of Commons, political 
There was this strange anomaly that, while the majority of """^^ ""* 
the Irish could vote for members of Parliament, they must vote for 
Protestants — a bitter mockery. The Irish demanded the right to 
govern themselves. Thus another aspect of the problem was purely 
political. 

The abuse just mentioned was removed in 1829, when Catholic 
Emancipation was carried, which henceforth permitted Catholics 
to sit in the House of Commons. The English statesmen catholic 
granted this concession only when forced to do so by the Emancipation 
imminent danger of civil war. The Irish consequently felt no 
gratitude. 

Shortly after Catholic Emancipation had been achieved, the Irish, 
under the matchless leadership of O'Connell, endeavored by much the 
same methods to obtain the repeal of the Union between xhe repeal 
England and Ireland, effected in 1801, and to win back a sep- movement 
arate parliament and a large measure of independence. This move- 
ment, for some time very formidable, failed completely, owing to the 
iron determination of the English that the union should not be broken, 
and to the fact that the leader, O'Connell, was not willing in last 
resort to risk civil war to accomplish the result, recognizing the hope- 
lessness of such a contest. This movement came to an end in 1843. 
However, a number of the younger followers of O'Connell, chagrined 
at his peaceful methods, formed a society called "Young Ireland," 
the aim of which was Irish independence and a republic. They rose 
in revolt in the troubled year, 1848. The revolt, however, was easily 
put down. 

As if Ireland did not suffer enough from political and social evils, 
an appalling catastrophe of nature was added. The Irish famine of 
1845-1847, to which reference has already been made, was a The Irish 
tragic calamity, far-reaching in its effects. The repeal of the famine 
Corn Laws did not check it. The distress continued for several 
years, though gradually growing less. The potato crop of 1846 was 
inferior to that of 1845, and the harvests of 1848 and 1849 were far 
from normal. Charity sought to aid, but was insufficient. The 
government gave money, and later gave rations. In March, 1847, 



532 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

over 700,000 people were receiving government support. In March 
and April of that year the deaths in the workhouses alone were more 
than ten thousand a month. Peasants ate roots and lichens, or 
flocked to the cities in the agony of despair, hoping for relief. Mul- 
titudes fled to England or crowded the emigrant ships to America, 
Decline of ^ying by the thousand of fever or exhaustion. It was a long- 
the popuia- drawn-out horror, and when it was over it was found that the 
^'""^ population had decreased from about 8,300,000 in 1845 to less 

than 6,600,000 in 1851. Since then the decrease occasioned by 
emigration has continued. By 1881 the population had fallen to 
5,100,000, by 1891 to 4,700,000, by 1901 to about 4,450,000. Since 
1851 perhaps 4,000,000 Irish have emigrated. Ireland, indeed, is 
probably the only country whose population decreased in the nine- 
teenth century. Year after year the emigration to the United States 
continued. 

When Gladstone came into power in 1 868 he was resolved to pacify 
the Irish by removing some of their more pronounced grievances. 

The question of the Irish Church, that is, of the Anglican Church in 
Ireland, the church of not more than one-eighth of the population, yet 
The Irish ^° which all Irishmen, Catholic or Protestant, paid tithes, 
Church dis- was the first grievance attacked. In 1869 Gladstone pro- 
estabhshed ^ured the passage of a law disestablishing and partly disendow- 
ing this church. The Church henceforth ceased to be connected 
with the State. Its bishops lost their seats in the House of Lords. 
It became a voluntary organization and was permitted to retain a 
large part of its property as an endowment. It was to have all 
the church buildings which it had formerly possessed. It was still 
very rich but the connection with the Church of England was to cease 
January i, 1871. 

THE SYSTEM OF LAND TENURE 

Gladstone now approached a far more serious and perplexing prob- 
lem, the system of land tenure. Ireland was almost exclusively an 
agricultural country, yet the land was chiefly owned not by those 
who lived on it and tilled it, but by a comparatively small number 
of landlords who held large estates. Many of these were Englishmen, 
The situation absentees, who rarely or never came to Ireland, and who 
in Ireland regarded their estates simply as so many sources of revenue. 
The business relations with their tenants were carried on by agents or 



THE PROBLEM OF THE LAND 533 

bailiffs, whose treatment of the tenants was frequently harsh and 
exasperating. If the peasant failed to pay his rent he could be 
evicted forthwith. As he was obliged to have land on which to raise 
his potatoes, almost his sole sustenance, he frequently agreed to pay 
a larger rent than the value of the land justified. Then in time he 
would be evicted and faced starvation. Moreover, when a landlord 
evicted his tenant he was not obliged to pay for any buildings 

, . , , , T T No compen- 

or improvements erected or carried out by the tenant. He sation for 
simply appropriated so much property created by the tenant. improve- 
Naturally there was no inducement to the peasant to develop 
his farm, for to do so meant a higher rent, or eviction and confiscation 
of his improvements. It would be hard to conceive a more unwise 
or unjust system. It encouraged indolence and slothfulness. 

Chronic and shocking misery was the lot of the Irish peasantry. 
"The Irish peasant," says an official English document of the time, 
"is the most poorly nourished, most poorly housed, most poorly 
clothed of any in Europe ; he has no reserve, no capital. He lives 
from day to day." His house was generally a rude stone hut, xhe 
with a dirt floor. The census of 184 1 established the fact that peasantry 
in the case of forty-six per cent of the population, the entire family 
lived in a house, or, more properly, hut of a single room. Frequently 
the room served also as a barn for the live stock. 

Stung by the misery of their position, and by the injustice of the 
laws which protected the landlord and gave them only two hard al- 
ternatives, surrender to the landlord or starvation, believing Deeds of 
that when evicted they were also robbed, and goaded by the violence 
hopeless outlook for the future, the Irish, in wild rage, committed 
many atrocious agrarian crimes, murders, arson, the killing or 
maiming of cattle. This in turn brought a new coercion law from the 
English Parliament which only aggravated the evil. 

In the Land Act now passed to remedy the evils of this system 
(1870) it was provided that, if evicted for any other reason than the 
non-payment of rent, the tenant could claim compensation, xhe Land 
He was also to receive compensation for any permanent im- ^^^ °* ^870 
provements he had made on the land whenever he should give up his 
holding for any reason whatever. There were certain other clauses 
in the bill designed to enable the peasants to buy the land outright, 
thus ceasing to be tenants of other people and becoming landowners 
themselves. This could be done only by purchasing the estates of the 



534 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

landlords, and this obviously the peasants were unable to do. It was 
provided, therefore, that the state should help the peasant up to a 
certain amount, he in turn repaying the state by easy installments for 
the money loaned. This Land Act of 1870 did not achieve what was 
hoped from it, did not bring peace to Ireland. Landlords found ways 
of evading it and evictions became more numerous than ever. Nor 
did the land purchase clauses prove effective. Only seven sales were 
made up to 1877. But the bill was important because of the prin- 
ciples it involved, and was to exercise a profound influence upon later 
legislation. For the time being nothing further was done for Ireland. 

EDUCATIONAL REFORMS 

Another measure of this active ministry was the Forster Education 
Act of 1870, designed to provide England with a national system of 
elementary education. England possessed no such system, it being 
the accepted opinion that education was no part of the duty of the 
state. The result was that the educational facilities were deplorably 
inadequate and inferior to those of many other countries. The 
Church work that the state neglected was discharged in a measure by 

schools schools which were maintained by the various religious de- 

nominations, particularly the Anglican, also the Catholic and the 
Methodist. But in 1869 it was estimated that of 4,300,000 children 
in need of education, 2,000,000 were not in school at all, 1,000,000 
were in very inferior schools, and only 1,300,000 in schools that were 
fairly efficient. 

The Gladstone ministry carried, in 1870, a bill designed to provide 

England for the first time in her history with a really national system 

The Forster °^ elementary education. The system then established re- 

Education mained without essential change until 1902. It marked a 

Act of 1870 great progress in the educational facilities of England. The 

bill did not establish an entirely new educational machinery, to be 

paid for by the state and managed by the state. It adopted the 

church schools on condition that they submit to state inspection to 

see if they were maintaining a certain standard. In that case they 

would receive financial aid from the state. But where there were 

not enough such schools, local school boards were to be elected in 

each such district with power to establish new schools, and to levy 

local taxes for the purpose. Under this system, which provided an 



A SERIES OF REFORMS 535 

adequate number of schools of respectable quality, popular education 
made great advances. In twenty years the number of schools more 
than doubled, and were capable of accommodating all those of 
school age. The law of 1870 did not establish either free or com- 
pulsory or secular education, but, in 1880, attendance was made 
compulsory and in 1891 education was made free. 

DEMOCRATIC REFORMS 

A number of other far-reaching reforms, democratic in their tend- 
ency, were carried through by this ministry. The army was 
reformed somewhat along Prussian lines, though the principle Army 
of corripulsory military service was not adopted. Officers' reform 
positions, which had previously been acquired by purchase and wliich 
were therefore monopolized by the rich, by the aristocracy, were 
now thrown open to merit. The Civil Service was put on the civil serv- 
basis of standing in open competitive examinations. The uni- i<=® reform 
versifies of Oxford and Cambridge were rendered thoroughly national 
by the abolition of the religious tests which had previously university 
made them a monopoly of the Church of England. Hence- reform 
forth men of any religious faith or no religious faith could enter them, 
could graduate from them. The universities henceforth belonged 
to all Englishmen. 

The Australian ballot was introduced, thus giving to each voter his 
independence. Previously intimidation or bribery had been very 
easy as voting had been oral and public ; now the voting secret voting 
was secret. Another feature of Gladstone's ministry, which introduced 
cost him much of his popularity at home, but was an act of high 
statesmanship and an indisputable contribution to the cause of peace 
among nations, was its adoption of the principle of arbitration in the 
controversy with the United States over the Alabama affair. The 
grievances of the United States against England because of her 
conduct during our Civil War were a dangerous source of friction 
between the two countries for many years. Gladstone agreed .^j^^ 
to submit them to arbitration, but as the decision of the Alabama 
Geneva Commission was against England (1872), his ministry ^^^"^ 
suffered in popularity. Nevertheless, Gladstone had established a 
valuable precedent. This was the greatest victory yet attained for 
the principle of settling international difficulties by arbitration 



536 



ENGLAND SINCE 1868 



rather than by war. In this sphere also this ministry advanced 
the interest of humanity, though it drew only disadvantage for 
itself from its service. 



THE DISRAELI MINISTRY 

Gladstone fell from power in 1874 and the Conservatives came in, 
with Disraeli as prime minister. Disraeli's administration lasted 
from 1874 to 1880. It differed as strikingly from Gladstone's 
as his character differed from 
that of his predecessor. As 
Gladstone had busied himself 
with Irish and domestic prob- 
lems, Disraeli displayed his 
greatest interest in colonial 
and foreign affairs. He found 
the situation favorable and 
the moment opportune for 
impressing upon England the 
political ideal, long germi- 
nating in his mind, succinctly 

The policy of Called imperialism, that 

Imperialism jg^ ^hc transcendant im- 
portance of breadth of view 
and vigor of assertion of 
England's position as a world 
power, as an empire, not as 
an insular state. In 1872 he 
had said: "In my judgment 
no minister in this country 

will do his duty who neglects any opportunity of reconstructing as 
much as possible our colonial empire, and of responding to those 
distant sympathies which may become the source of incalculable 
strength and happiness to this land." This principle Disraeli 
emphasized in act and speech during his six years of power. It was 
imperfectly realized under him ; it was partially reconsidered and 
revised by Gladstone upon his return to power in 1880. But it had 
definitely received lodgment in the mind of England before he left 
power. It gave a new note to English politics. This is Disraeli's 




Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Beaconsfield 
From a photograph. 



DISRAELI AND IMPERIALISM 537 

historic significance in the annals of British politics. He greatly 
stimulated interest in the British colonies. He invoked " the sublime 
instinct of an ancient people." 

THE SUEZ CANAL 

His first conspicuous achievement in foreign affairs was the pur- 
chase of the Suez Canal shares. The Suez Canal had been built by 
the French against ill-concealed English opposition. Dis- 
raeli had himself declared that the undertaking would inevit- the Suez 
ably be a failure. Now that the canal was built its success was ^^^^^ 

. . shares 

speedily apparent. It radically changed the conditions of 
commerce with the East. It shortened greatly the distance to the 
Orient by water. Hitherto a considerable part of the commerce 
with India, China, and Australia had been carried on by the long 
voyage around the Cape of Good Hope. Some went by the Red 
Sea route, but that involved transshipment at Alexandria. Now it 
could all pass through the canal. About three-fourths of the ton- 
nage passing through the canal was English. It was the direct road 
to India. There were some 400,000 shares in the Canal Company. 
The Khedive of Egypt held a large block of these, and the Khedive 
was nearly bankrupt. Disraeli bought, in 1875, his 177,000 shares 
by telegraph for four million pounds, and the fact was announced 
to a people who had never dreamed of it, but who applauded what 
seemed a brilliant stroke, somehow checkmating the French. It 
was said, that the highroad to India was now 'secure. The political 
significance of this act was that it determined at least in principle 
the future of the relations of England to Egypt, and that it seemed 
to strike the note of imperial self-assertion which was Disraeli's 
chief ambition and which was the most notable characteristic of his 
administration. 

At the same time Disraeli resolved to emphasize the importance of 
India, England's leading colon}^ in another way. He proposed a new 
and sounding title for the British sovereign. She was to be Empress 
of India. The Opposition denounced this as "cheap" and 

,, ,,, , . r • TTT 1^-ii The Queen 

tawdry, a vulgar piece of pretension. Was not the title proclaimed 
of King or Oueen borne bv the sovereigns of England for Empress of 

India 

a thousand years glorious enough? But Disraeli urged it 

as showing " the unanimous determination of the people of the 



538 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

country to retain our connection with the Indian Empire. And it 
will be an answer to those mere economists and those diplomatists 
who announce that India is to us only a burden or a danger. By 
passing this bill then, the House will show, in a manner that is unmis- 
takable, that they look upon India as one of the most precious pos- 
sessions of the Crown, and their pride that it is a part of her empire 
and governed by her imperial throne." 

The reasoning was weak, but the proposal gave great satisfaction to 
the Queen, and it was enacted into law. On January i, 1877, the 
Queen's assumption of the new title was officially announced in 
India before an assembly of the ruling princes. 

In Europe Disraeli insisted upon carrying out a spirited foreign 

policy. His opportunity came with the reopening of the Eastern 

Question, or the question of the integrity of Turkey, in 1876. 

oAhe"*''^ For two years this problem absorbed the interest and atten- 

Eastern ^-Jq^ of rulcrs and diplomatists, and England had much to 

Question '^ ^ 

do with the outcome. This subject may, however, be better 
studied in connection with the general history of the Eastern problem 
in the nineteenth century. ^ 

Disraeli, who in 1876 became Lord Beaconsfield, continued in 
power until 1880. The emphasis he put upon imperial and colonial 
problems was to exert a considerable influence upon the rising genera- 
tion, and upon the later history of England. Imperial and colonial 
have vied with Irish questions in dominating the political discussions 
of England during the last thirty years. 

GLADSTONE'S SECOND MINISTRY 

In 1880 the Liberals were restored to power and Gladstone became 
prime minister for the second time. 

Gladstone's greatest ability lay in internal reform, as his previous 

ministry had shown. This was the field of his inclination, and, as he 

thought, of the national welfare. Peace, retrenchment, and 

Gladstone reform, the watchwords of his party, now represented the 

?*i^®*''L program he wished to follow. But this was not to be. 

( 1 880— 1 085) ^ . - . 

While certam great measures of mternal improvement were 
passed during the next five years, those years on the whole were 
characterized by the dominance of imperial and colonial questions, 

1 See Chapter XXXI. 



NEW LAND LEGISLATION 539 

with attendant wars. Gladstone was forced to busy himself with 
foreign policy far more than in his previous administration. Serious 
questions confronted him in Asia and Africa. These may best be 
studied, however, in the chapter on the British Empire.^ 

Two pieces of domestic legislation of great importance enacted 
during this ministry merit description, the Irish Land Act of 1881, 
and the Reform Bills of 1884- 1885. 

THE LAND ACT OF 1 881 

The legislation of Gladstone's preceding ministry had not pacified 
Ireland. Indeed, the Land Act of 1870 had proved no final settle- 
ment, but a great disappointment. It had established the p^^^ ^^ 
principle that the tenant was to be compensated if deprived of Land Act of 
his farm except for non-payment of rent, and was to be compen- ^ ^° 
sated, in any case, for all the permanent improvements which he had 
made upon the land. But this was not sufficient to give the tenant any 
security in his holding. It did not prevent the landlord from raising 
the rent. Then if the peasant would not pay this increased rent 
he must give up his holding. He therefore had no stable tenure. In 
the new Land Act of 1881 Gladstone sought to give the peasant, in 
addition to the compensation for improvement previously _. 
secured, a fair rent, a fixed rent, one that was not constantly and the 
subject to change at the will of the landlord, and freedom of sale, *^^^ ^ ^ 
that is, the liberty of the peasant to sell his holding to some other 
peasant. These were the "three F's," which had once represented 
the demands of advanced Irishmen, though they no longer did. 
Henceforth, the rent was to be determined by a court, established 
for the purpose. Rents, once judicially determined, were to be 
unchangeable for fifteen years, during which time the tenant might 
not be evicted except for breaches of covenant, such as non-payment 
of rent. There was also attached to the bill a provision similar to 
the one in the preceding measure of 1870, looking toward the creation 
of a peasant proprietorship. The Government was to loan money 
to the peasants under certain conditions, and on easy terms, to 
enable them to buy out the landlords, thus becoming complete owners 
themselves. 

The bill passed though it was opposed with unusual bitterness. 

1 Chapter XXVIII. 



540 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

Landowners, believing that it meant a reduction of rents, determined 

not by themselves but by a court, called it confiscation of property. 

It was attacked because it established the principle that rents 

as confisca- wcre not to be determined, like the price of other things, 

tion of ]3y j-j^g la^^ Qf supply and demand ; were not to be what 

property 

the landlord might demand and the peasant agree to pay, 
but were to be reasonable and their reasonableness was to be decided 
by outsiders, judges, having no direct interest at all, that is, in last 
resort, by the state. The bill was criticized as altering ruthlessly 
the nature of property in land, as establishing dual ownership. 



EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE 

Gladstone carried through at this time the third of those great 
reform acts of the nineteenth century by which England has been 
The Reform transformed from an oligarchy into a democracy. The 
Biu of 1884 Reform Bill of 1832 had given the suffrage to the wealthier 
members of the middle class. The Reform Bill of 1867 had taken 
a long step in the direction of democracy by practically giving the 
vote to the lower middle class and the bulk of the laboring class in the 
boroughs but it did not greatly benefit those living in the country 
districts. The franchise in the boroughs was wider than in the 
counties. The result was that laborers in boroughs had the vote, 
but agricultural laborers did not. There was apparently no reason 
for maintaining this difference. Gladstone's bill of 1884 aimed at 
the abolition of this inequality between the two classes of constitu- 
The county encics, by extending the borough franchise to the counties 
franchise SO that the mass of workingmen would have the right to vote 
^* ^°® whether they lived in town or country. The county fran- 

chise, previously higher, was to be exactly assimilated to the borough 
franchise. The bill as passed doubled the number of county voters, 
and increased the total number of the electorate from over three 
to over five millions. Gladstone's chief argument was that this 
measure would lay the foundations of the government broad and deep 
in the people's will, and "array the people in one solid compacted 
mass around the ancient throne which it has loved so well, and 
around a constitution now to be more than ever powerful, and more 
than ever free." 

From 1884 to 191 8 there was no further extension of the suffrage. 



THE REFORM BILL OF 1884 541 

There were many men who had no vote because they were unable to 
meet any one of the various property quahfications that gave the vote ; 
for it must be remembered that there was no such thine as „ ,.„ 

'^ Quahfica- 

universal manhood suffrage in England. Only those voted who tions for 
had some one of the kinds of property indicated in the various '"^"'^ 
laws of 1832, 1867, and 1884. The condition of the franchise was 
historical, not rational. Many men possessed several votes ; others 
none at all. There was, during this period, a demand for the en- 
franchisement of all adult males ; there was also a vigorous agitation 
for woman's suffrage ; and the Liberal party was pledged to the 
abolition of the practice of plural voting. There was no redistribu- 
tion of parliamentary seats from 1885 to 1918. There is in England 
no periodical adjustment according to population, as in the United 
States after each census. During this period some electoral districts 
were ten, or even fifteen times as large as others. Constituencies 
ranged from about 13,000 to over 217,000. 

Gladstone's second ministry fell in 1885. There followed a few 
months of Conservative control under Lord Salisbury. But in 1886 
new elections were held and Gladstone came back into power again, 
prime minister for the third time. 

THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 

He was confronted by the Irish problem in a more acute form 
than ever before. For the Irish were now demanding a far-reaching 
change in government. They were demanding Home Rule : _, 

° ^ - & I Demand for 

that is, an Irish Parliament for the management of the in- an Irish 
ternal affairs of Ireland. They had constantly smarted ^^'■''^'"^"* 
under the injury which they felt had been done them by the abolition 
of their former Parliament, which sat in Dublin, and which was 
abolished by the Act of Union of 1800. The feeling for nationality, 
one of the dominant forces of the nineteenth century everywhere, 
acted upon them with unusual force. They disliked, for historical 
and sentimental reasons, the rule of an English Parliament, and the 
sense as well as reality of subjection to an alien people. They did 
not wish the separation of Ireland from England but they did wish a 
separate parliament for Irish affairs on the ground that the Parlia- 
ment at Westminster had neither the time nor the understanding 
necessar}' for the proper consideration of measures affecting the Irish. 



542 



ENGLAND SINCE il 



The Home 
Rulers hold 
the balance 
of power 

tion. 



The Home Rule party had been slowly growing for several years 
when, in 1879, it came under the leadership of Charles Stewart Parnell, 
who, unlike the other great 
leaders of Irish history, such 
as Grattan and O'Connell, was 
no orator and was of a cold, 
haughty, distant nature, but 
of an inflexible will. Under 
his able leadership the party 
increased in numbers, in co- 
hesion, in grim determination. 
Parnell's object was to make 
it so large that it could hold 
the balance of power in the 

House of Commons. In 

the Parliament which 

met in 1886 the Home 

Rulers were in this posi- 
If they united with the 
Conservatives the two com- 
bined would have exactly the 
same number of votes as the 
Liberals. As the Conserva- 
tives would not help them Charles Stewart Parnell 
they sided with the Liberals. After the painting by Sydney p. Hall. 




GLADSTONE'S THIRD MINISTRY 

Gladstone entered upon his third administration February i, 
1886. It was his shortest ministry, lasting less than six months. 
It was wholly devoted to the question of Ireland. The Irish had 
The Irish plainly indicated their wishes in the recent elections in returning 
question a solid body of 85 Home Rulers out of the 103 members to 

which Ireland was entitled. Gladstone was enormously im- 
pressed by this fact, the outcome of the first election held on prac- 
tically a democratic franchise. He had tried in previous legislation 
to rule the Irish according to Irish rather than English ideas, where 
he considered those ideas just. He believed the great blot upon the 
annals of England to be the Irish chapter, written, as it had been, by 



dominant 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 543 

English arrogance, hatred, and uninteUigence. ReconciUation had 
been his keynote hitherto. Moreover, to him there seemed but two 
alternatives — either further reform along the lines desired by the 
Irish, or the old, sad story of hard yet unsuccessful coercion. Glad- 
stone would have nothing more to do with the latter method. He, 
therefore, resolved to endeavor to give to Ireland the Home Rule 
she plainly desired. On the 8th of April, 1886, he introduced jhe Home 
the Irish Government Bill, announcing that it would be Rule Bill 
followed by a Land Bill, the two parts of a single scheme which could 
not be separated. 

The bill, thus introduced, provided for an Irish Parliament to sit in 
Dublin, controlling a ministry of its own, and legislating on Irish, as 
distinguished from imperial affairs. A difficulty arose right here. 
If the Irish were to have a legislature of their own for their 
own affairs, ought they still to sit in the Parliament in London, irjsh sit^ 
with power there to mix in English and Scotch affairs? On in.West- 
the other hand, if they ceased to have members in London, 
they would have no share in legislating for the Empire as a whole. 
"This," says Morley, "was from the first, and has ever since remained, 
the Gordian knot." The bill provided that they should be excluded 
from the Parliament at Westminster. On certain topics it was 
further provided that the Irish Parliament should never legislate : 
questions affecting the Crown, the army and navy, foreign and 
colonial affairs ; nor should it establish or endow any religion, 

Gladstone did not believe that the Irish difficulty would be solved 
simply by new political machinery. There 'was a serious social 
question not reached by this, the land question, not yet Land Pur- 
solved to the satisfaction of the Irish. He introduced imme- '^^^^^ ^'^ 
diately a Land Bill, which was to effect a vast transfer of land to 
the peasants by purchase from the landlords, and which might 
perhaps involve an expenditure to the state of about 120,000,000 
pounds. 

The introduction of these bills, whose passage would mean a radical 
transformation of Ireland, precipitated one of the fiercest struggles 
in English parliamentary annals. They were urged as neces- opposition 
sary to settle the question once for all on a solid basis, as *° ^^^ *>iiis 
adapted to bring peace and contentment to Ireland, and thus 
strengthen the Union. Otherwise, said those who supported them, 
England had no alternative but coercion, a dreary and dismal failure. 



544 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

On the other hand, the strongest opposition arose out of the belief 
that these bills imperiled the very existence of the Union. The 
exclusion of the Irish members from Parliament seemed to many 
to be the snapping of the cords that held the countries together. 
Did not this bill really dismember the British Empire? Needless 
to say, no British statesman could urge any measure of that char- 
acter. Gladstone thought that his bills meant the reconciliation of 
two peoples estranged for centuries, and that reconciliation meant 
the strengthening rather than the weakening of the Empire, that 
the historic policy of England towards Ireland had only resulted 
in alienation, hatred, the destruction of the spiritual harmony which 
is essential to real unity. But, said his opponents, to give the Irish 
a parliament of their own, and to exclude them from the Parliament 
in London, to give them control of their own legislature, their own 
The Union executive, their own judiciary, their own police, must lead 
in danger ! inevitably to separation. You exclude them from all partici- 
pation in imperial affairs, thus rendering their patriotism the more 
intensely local. You provide, it is true, that they shall bear a part 
of the burdens of the Empire. Is this proviso worth the paper it 
is written on? Will they not next regard this as a grievance, this 
taxation without representation, and will not the old animosity break 
out anew? You abandon the Protestants of Ireland to the revenge 
of the Catholic majority of the new Parliament. To be sure, you 
provide for toleration in Ireland, but again is this toleration worth 
the paper it is written on ? 

Probably the strongest force in opposition to the bill was the opin- 
ion widely held in England of Irishmen, that they were thoroughly 
_ .. . disloyal to the Empire, that they would delight to use their 

dislike of new autonomy to pay off old scores by aiding the enemies of 
the Irish England, that they were traitors in disguise, or undisguised, 

that they had no regard for property or contract, that an era of 
religious oppression and of confiscation of property would be in- 
augurated by this new agency of a parliament of their own. 

The introduction of the Home Rule Bill aroused an amount of 
bitterness unknown in recent English history. The Conservative 
. party opposed it to a man, and it badly disrupted the Liberal 

of the Lib- party. Nearly a hundred Liberals withdrew and joined the 
erai party Conservatives. These men called themselves Liberal- Union- 
ists, Liberals, but not men who were prepared to jeopardize the Union 



DISRUPTION OF THE LIBERAL PARTY 545 

as they held that this measure would do. The result was that the bill 
was beaten by 343 votes to 313. 

Gladstone dissolved Parliament and appealed to the people. The 
question was vehemently discussed before the voters. The The Con- 
result was disastrous to the Gladstonian Home Rulers. A jg'yrnedlo 
majority of over a hundred was rolled up against Gladstone's power 
policy. 

The consequences of this introduction of the Home Rule proposi- 
tion into British politics were momentous. One was the impotence, 
for most of the next twenty years, of the Liberal party. A consider- 
able fraction of it, on the whole the least democratic, went over to the 
Conservatives and the result was the creation of the Unionist Coali- 
tion which for the next twenty years, with a single interruption, was 
to rule England. The Unionists had a new policy, that of Imperial- 
ism. They had preserved the Union, they thought, by defeating 
Home Rule. They now went farther and became the champions of 
imperial expansion. On the other hand, the Liberal party, now that 
its more aristocratic elements had left it, became more pronouncedly 
democratic. The line of division between the two parties became 
sharper. But for the present the Liberal party was in the hopeless 
minority. 

SALISBURY'S LAND PURCHASE ACT 

On the fall of Gladstone, Lord Salisbury came into power, head 
of a Conservative or Unionist Government. The Irish question con- 
fronted it as it had confronted Gladstone"s ministry. As The Second 
it would not for a moment consider any measure granting Ministry^ 
self-government to the Irish, it was compelled to govern them (1886-1892) 
in the old way, by coercion, by force, by relentless suppression of 
liberties freely enjoyed in England. But the policy of this ministry 
was not simply negative. Holding that the only serious Irish xhe policy 
grievance was the land problem and that, if this were once com- °^ coercion 
pletely solved, then this new-fangled demand for a political reform 
would drop away, the Conservatives adopted boldly the policy of 
purchase that had been timidly applied in Gladstone's Land Acts of 
ifSyo and 1881. The idea was that if only the Irish could get full 
ownership of their land, could get the absentee and oppressive land- 
lords out of the way, then they would be happy and prosperous and 
would no longer care for such political nostrums as Home Rule. 



546 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

The land purchase clauses of Gladstone's acts had had no great 
effect as the state had offered to advance only two-thirds of the pur- 
chase price. The Conservatives now provided that the state should 
advance the whole of it, the peasants repaying the state by install- 
ments covering a long number of years. The Government buys the 
land, sells it to the peasant, who that instant becomes its legal owner, 
j^ , and who pays for it gradually. He actually pays less in this 

Purchase way cach year then he formerly paid for rent, and in the end 
'^^ he has his holding unencumbered. This bill was passed in 

1891, and in five years some 35,000 tenants were thus enabled to 
purchase their holdings under its provisions. The system was 
extended much further in later years, particularly by the Land Act 
of 1903, which set aside a practically unlimited amount of money 
for the purpose. From 1903 to 1908 there were about 160,000 pur- 
chasers. Under this act, which simply increased the inducements 
to the landlords to sell, Ireland is becoming a country of small 
freeholders. The earlier principle of dual ownership recognized in 
Gladstone's land legislation of 1881 has given way completely to this 
new principle of individual ownership, but no longer individual owner- 
ship by the great landowners but now by the peasants, the inhab- 
itants of Ireland. The economic prosperity of Ireland has steadily 
increased in recent years. 

This ministry passed other bills of a distinctly liberal character ; 
among them an act absolutely prohibiting the employment of children 
under ten, an act designed to reduce the oppression of the sweat-shop 
Social by limiting the labor of women to twelve hours a day, with 

legislation ^.n hour and a half for meals, an act making education free, 
and a small allotment act intended to create a class of peasant pro- 
prietors in England. These measures were supported by all parties. 
They were important as indicating that social legislation was likely to 
be in the coming years more important than political legislation, 
which has proved to be the case. They also show that the Conserva- 
tive party was changing in character, and was willing to assume a 
leading part in social reform. 

In respect to another item of internal policy, the Salisbury ministry 

took a stand which has been decisive ever since. In 1 889 it secured an 

Increase of immense increase of the navy. Seventy ships were to be 

the navy added at an expense of 21,500,000 pounds during the next 

seven years. Lord Salisbury laid it down as a principle that the 



THE SECOND HOME RULE BILL 547 

British navy ought to be equal to any other two navies of the world 
combined. 

In foreign affairs the most important work of this ministry lay in 
its share in the partition of Africa, which will be described elsewhere.^ 

DEFEAT OF THE HOME RULE BILL 

The general elections of 1892 resulted in the return to power of the 
Liberals, supported by the Irish Home Rulers, and Gladstone, at the 
age of eighty-two, became for the fourth time prime min- 
ister, a record unparalleled in English history. As he him- Gladstone 

self said, the one single tie that still bound him to public life Ministry 

* "^ (1892-1894) 

was his interest m securing Home Rule for Ireland before his 

end. It followed necessarily from the nature of the case that public 
attention was immediately concentrated anew on that question. 
Early in 1893 Gladstone introduced his Second Home Rule j^e Second 
Bill. The opposition to it was exceedingly bitter and pro- Home Rule 
longed. Very few new arguments were brought forward on 
either side. Party spirit ran riot. Gladstone expressed with all 
his eloquence his faith in the Irish people, his belief that the only 
alternative to his policy was coercion, and that coercion would be 
forever unsuccessful, his conviction that it was the duty of England to 
atone for six centuries of misrule. 

After eighty-two days of discussion, marked by scenes of great dis- 
order, members on one occasion coming to blows to the great damage 
of decorous parliamentary traditions, the bill was carried by a Passed by 
majority of 34 (301 to 267). A week later it was defeated in ^^^ Com- 

, . mons, 

the House of Lords by 419 to 41, or a majority of more than defeated by 
ten to one. The bill was dead. ^^^ ^^'^^ 

Gladstone's fourth ministry was balked successfully at every turn 
by the House of Lords, which, under the able leadership of Lord Salis- 
bury, recovered an actual power it had not possessed since Resignation 
1832. In 1894 Gladstone resigned his office, thus bringing to a °^ Gladstone 
close one of the most remarkable political careers known to English 
history. His last speech in Parliament was a vigorous attack upon 
the House of Lords. In his opinion, that House had become the 
great obstacle, to progress. "The issue which is raised between a 
deliberative assembly, elected by the votes of more than 6,000,000 

1 Chapter XXIX. 



/ 548 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

people," and an hereditary body, "is a controversy which, when once 
raised, must go forward to an issue." This speech was his last in 
an assembly where his first had been delivered sixty-one years before. 
Gladstone died four years later, and was buried in Westminster Abbey 
(1898). 

In the elections of 1895 the Unionists secured a majority of a hun- 
dred and fifty. They were to remain uninterruptedly in power until 
December, 1905. 

THE THIRD SALISBURY MINISTRY 

Lord Salisbury became prime minister for the third time. He re- 
mained such until 1902, when he withdrew from public life, being suc- 
ceeded by his nephew, Arthur James Balfour. There was, however, 
no change of party. Lord Salisbury had an immense majority in the 
House of Commons. His ministry contained several very able men. 
He himself assumed the Foreign Office, Joseph Chamberlain the 
Colonial Office, Balfour the leadership of the House of Commons. 
The withdrawal of Gladstone and the divisions in the Liberal party 
reduced that party to a position of ineffective opposition. The 
Irish question sank into the background as the Unionists, resolutely 
opposed to the policy of an independent parliament in Ireland, 
refused absolutely to consider Home Rule. They did, on the other 
hand, pass certain acts beneficial to Ireland, land purchase acts on a 
vast scale and measures extending somewhat the strictly local self- 
government in Ireland. Much social and labor legislation was also 
enacted. 

The commanding question of this period was to be that of imperial- 
ism, and the central figure was Joseph Chamberlain, a man remark- 
able for vigor and audacity, and the most popular member of 
Chamberlain, the Cabinet. Chamberlain, who had made his reputation as 
Colonial an advanced Liberal, an advocate of radical social and economic 

ecre ary reforms, now stood forth as the spokesman of imperialism. 
His office, that of Colonial Secretary, gave him excellent opportunities 
to emphasize the importance of the colonies to the mother country, 
the desirability of drawing them closer together, of promoting imperial 
federation. 

The sixtieth anniversary of Queen Victoria's accession occurring in 
1897 was the occasion of a remarkable demonstration of the loyalty of 
the colonies to the Empire, as well as of the universal respect and 



END OF THE VICTORIAN ERA 



549 



affection in which the sovereign was held. This diamond jubilee 
was an imposing demonstration of the strength of the sentiment of 
union tha.t bound the various sections of the Empire to- 
gether, of the advantages accruing to each from the connection vic^j^ria's 
with the others, of the pride of power. Advantage was taken, diamond 
too, of the presence of the prime mmisters of the various 

colonies in London 
to discuss methods of 
drawing the various 
parts of the Empire 
more closely to- 
gether. All these cir- 
cumstances gave 
expression to that 
"imperialism " which 
was becoming an in- 
creasing factor in 
British politics. 

A period of great 
activity in foreign 
and colonial affairs 
began almost im- 
mediately after the 
inauguration of the 
new Unionist minis- 
try. It was „r • 

-' War in 

shown in the South 
recovery of the ^"^^ 
Soudan by Lord 
Kitchener, but the 
most important chap- 
ter in this activity 
concerned the conditions in South Africa which led, in 1899, to the 
Boer War, and which had important consequences. This will better 
be described elsewhere.^ This war, lasting from 1899 to 1902, pg^jjj ^,f 
much longer than had been anticipated, absorbed the attention Queen 
of England until its successful termination. Internal legislation ''^tona 
was of slight importance. During the war Queen Victoria died, 

'See pp. 575-581. 




Queen Victoria, at the Age of Seventy-eight 

From the painting by Baron von Angeli, at Windsor 
Castle. 



550 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

January 22, 1901, after a reign of over sixty-three years, the 
longest in British history, and then exceeded elsewhere only by 
the seventy-one years' reign of Louis XIV of France. She had 
proved during her entire reign, which began in 1837, a model con- 
stitutional monarch, subordinating her will to that of the people, 
as expressed by the ministrj^ and Parliament. "She passed away," 
-„ . , said Balfour in the House of Commons, "without an enemy in 

Reign of ' -' 

Edward vn, the world, for even those who loved not England loved her." 
1901-1910 -pj^g reign of Edward VII (1901-1910), then in his sixty- 
second year, began. 

When the South African war was over Parliament turned its atten- 
tion to domestic affairs. In 1902 it passed an Education Act which 
superseded that of Gladstone's first ministry, the Forster Act of 1870, 
Education already described. It abolished the school boards estab- 
-Actof 1902 lished by that law. It admitted the principle of the support 
of denominational schools out of taxes. In such schools the head 
teacher must belong to the denomination concerned and a majority 
of the managers of those schools would also be members of the 
denomination. 

The bill gave great offense to Dissenters and believers in secular 
education. It authorized taxation for the advantage of a denomina- 
tion of which multitudes of taxpayers were not members. It was 
held to be a measure for increasing the power of the Church of 
England, considered one of the bulwarks of Conservatism. 

The opposition to this law was intense. Thousands refused to pay 
their taxes, and their property was, therefore, sold by public authority 
to meet the taxes. Many were imprisoned. There were over 70,000 
summonses to court. The agitation thus aroused was one of the great 
causes for the crushing defeat of the Conservative party in 1905. 
Yet the law of 1902 was put into force and remained the law of 
England until 19 18, the Liberals having failed in 1906 in an attempt to 
pass an education bill of their own to supersede it. The educational 
system continued one of the contentious problems of English politics. 

The popularity of the Unionist ministry began to wane after the 

close of the South African war. Much of its legislation was de- 

„ .„ nounced as class legislation designed to bolster up the Conserva- 

Tariff re- o o r- 

form pro- tive party, not to serve the interest of all England. More- 
posed Q^^gj. ^ ^g^ issue was now injected into British politics which 
divided the Unionists, as Home Rule had divided the Liberals. 



TARIFF REFORM 551 

Chamberlain came forward with a proposition for tariff reform as a 
means of binding the Empire more closely together. He urged that 
England impose certain tariff duties against the outside world, at the 
same time exempting her colonies from their operation. He called 
this policy "colonial preference." It would be that but it would 
also be the abandonment of the free trade policy of Great Britain 
and the adoption of the protective system. 

As the discussion of this proposal developed it became apparent 
that Englishmen had not yet lost their faith in free trade as still 
greatly to their advantage, if not absolutely essential to their welfare. 
The new controversy disrupted the Unionist party and reunited the 
Liberals. 

The result of this increasing disaffection was shown in the crushing 
defeat of the Unionists and the inauguration of a very different policy 
under the Liberals. Since December, 1905, the Liberal party has 
been in power, first under the premiership of Sir Henry Campbell- 
Bannerman, and then, after his death early in 1908, under that of 
Herbert Asquith, who gave way, in December, 19 16, to Lloyd George, 
a Liberal, but whose ministry was a coalition ministry, composed 
of members of both parties. This party won in the General Elections 
of 1906 the largest majority ever obtained since 1832. 

OLD-AGE PENSIONS 

An important achievement of this administration was the passage 
in 1908 of the Old- Age Pensions Act, which marks a long step forward 
in the extension of state activity. It grants, under certain slight 
restrictions, pensions to all persons of a certain age and of a small 
income. Denounced as paternalistic, as socialistic, as sure to under- 
mine the thrift and the sense of responsibility of the laborers of 
Great Britain, it was urged as a reasonable and proper recognition of 
the value of the services to the country of the working classes, services 
as truly to be rewarded as those of army and navy and administra- 
tion. The act provides that persons seventy years of age whose 
income does not exceed twenty-five guineas a year shall receive a 
weekly pension of five shillings, that those with larger incomes shall 
receive proportionately smaller amounts, down to the minimum of 
one shilling a week. Those whose income exceeds thirty guineas and 
ten shillings a year receive no pensions. It was estimated by the 



552 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

prime minister that the initial burden to the state would be about 
seven and a half million pounds, an amount that would necessarily 
increase in later years. The post office is used as the distributing 
agent. This law went into force on January i, 1909. On that day 
over half a million men and women went to the nearest post office 
and drew their first pensions of from one to five shillings, and on 
every Friday henceforth as long as they live they may do the same. 
It was noticed that these men and women accepted their pensions 
not as a form of charity or poor relief, but as an honorable reward. 
The statistics of those claiming under this law are instructive and 
sobering. In the county of London one person in every one hundred 
and seventeen was a claimant ; in England and Wales one in eighty- 
six ; in Scotland one in sixty-seven ; in Ireland one in twenty-one. 
The Unionist party had been in control from 1895 to 1905. Its 
„ ... . chief emphasis had been put upon problems of imperialism, 
party from Social legislation had slipped into the background. But the 
I 95 to 1905 conduct and course of the Boer War, the great adventure in 
imperialism, had not increased the reputation for statesmanship 
or the popularity of the Conservatives, and their domestic legislation 
aiming, as was held, at the strengthening of the Established Church 
and the liquor trade, two stout and constant defenders of the party, 
exposed them to severe attack as aristocratic, as believers in privileged 
and vested interests, as hostile to the development of the democratic 
forces in the national life. 

Now that the Liberals were in power they turned energetically to 

undo the class legislation of the previous ministry, to remove the ob- 

Democratic staclcs to the development of truly popular government. 

policy of the j^g new Liberal party was more radical than the old Liberal 

party since party of the time of the first Home Rule Bill as the more 

^'°5 conservative Liberals had left it then and had gone over to 

the opposition. Moreover there now appeared in Parliament a 

party more radical still, the Labor party, with some fifty members. 

Radical social and labor legislation was now attempted. That the 

existing social system weighed with unjust severity upon the masses 

was recognized by the ministry. "Property," said Asquith, "must 

be associated in the mind of the masses of the people, with the ideas 

of reason and justice." In the attempt to realize this aim the Liberal 

party was forced into new and momentous enterprises. 



A GRAVE CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM 553 

THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS 

But when the Liberals attempted to carry out their fresh and pro- 
gressive program they immediately .confronted a most formidable 
obstacle. They passed through the House of Commons xhe Liber- 
an Education Bill, to remedy the evils of the Education Act ^^ blocked 

by the 

of 1902, enacted in the interests chiefly of the Established House of 
Church ; also a Licensing Bill designed to penalize the liquor ^"'^^ 
trade which Conservative legislation had greatly favored ; a bill 
abolishing plural voting, which gave such undue weight to the prop- 
ertied classes, enabling rich men to cast several votes at a time when 
many poor men did not have even a single vote. The obstacle en- 
countered at every step was the House of Lords, which threw out 
these bills and stood right athwart the path of the Liberal party, 
firmly resolved not to let any ultra-democratic measures pass, firmly 
resolved also to maintain all the ground the Conservatives had won 
in the previous administrations. A serious political and constitu- 
tional problem thus arose which had to be settled before the . 

^ . A constitu- 

Liberals could use their immense popular majority, as shown in tionai 
the House of Commons, for the enactment of Liberal policies, p''"''^®™ 
The House of Lords, which was always ruled by the Conservatives, 
and which was not, being an hereditary body, subject to direct 
popular control, now asserted its power frequently and, in the opinion 
of the Liberals, flagrantly, by rejecting peremptorily the more dis- 
tinctive Liberal measures. The Lords, encouraged by their easy suc- 
cesses in blocking the Commons, blithely took another step forward, 
a step which, as events were to prove, was to precede a resounding 
fall. The Lords in 1909 rejected the budget, a far more serious act 
of defiance of the popular chamber than any of these others had been, 
and a most conspicuous revelation of the spirit of confidence which 
the Lords had in their power, now being so variously and systemati- 
cally asserted. 

THE BUDGET OF 1909 

In 1909 Lloyd George, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced 
the budget. He announced correctly that two new lines of heavy 
expenditure, the payment of old-age pensions and the rapid „ 
enlargement of the navy, necessitated new and additional additional 
taxation. The new taxes which he proposed would bear *^^^*""> 
mainly on the wealthy classes. The income tax was to be increased. 



554 



ENGLAND SINCE 1868 



In addition there was to be a special or super-tax on incomes of over 
£5,000. A distinction was to be made between earned and unearned 
incomes — the former being the result of the labor of the individual, 
the latter being the income from investments, representing no direct 
personal activity on the part of the individual receiving them. 
Unearned incomes were to be taxed higher than earned. Inheritance 
taxes were to be graded more sharply and to vary decidedly according 
to the amount involved. New 
taxes on land of various kinds 
were also to be levied. 

This budget aroused the 
most vehement opposition of 

Opposition to the class of landowners, 

the budget capitalists, bankers, per- 
sons of large property inter- 
ests, persons who lived on the 
money they had inherited, on 
their investments. They de- 
nounced the bill as socialistic, 
as revolutionary, as, in short, 
odious class legislation di- 
rected against the rich, as 
confiscatory, as destructive of 
all just property rights. 

The budget passed the 
House of Commons by a large 

The Lords majority. It then went 

reject the to the House of Lords. 

budget p^j. ^ Yong time it had not been supposed that the Lords had 

any right to reject money bills, as they were an hereditary and not 
a representative body. They, however, now asserted that they had 
that right, although they had not exercised it within the memory of 
men. After a few days of debate they rejected the budget by a 
vote of 350 to 75 (November 30, 1909). 

The act At once was precipitated an exciting and momentous politi- 

deciaredun- (^gl q^^^ constitutional Struggle. The Liberals, blocked again 

constitutional ... , , / , • 

by the by the hereditary chamber, consisting solely of the aristocracy 

Commons ^f ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ blocked this time in a field which had long 

been considered very particularly to be reserved for the House of 




Daviu Lloyd Geokgk 



THE POWER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS 



555 



Commons, indignantly picked up the gantlet which the Lords had 
thrown down. The House of Commons voted overwhelmingly, 349 to 
134, that the action of the Lords was "a breach of the Constitution 
and a usurpation of the rights of the House of Commons." . 

1 1 TT Asquith 

Asquith declared in a crowded House that "the House would defines the 
be unworthy of its past and of those traditions of which '^^"^ 
it is the custodian and the trustee," if it allowed any time to 

pass without showing that it 
would not brook this usurpa- 
tion. He declared that the 
"power of the purse " belonged 
to the Commons alone. The 
very principle of representa- 
tive government was at stake. 
For if the Lords possessed the 
right they had assumed the 
situation was exactly this : 
that when the voters elected 
a majority of Conservatives to 
the Commons then the Con- 
servatives would control the 
legislation ; that, when they 
elected a majority of Liberals, 
the Conservatives would still 
control 'by being able to block 
all legislation they disliked by 
the veto of the House of 
Lords, always and perma- 
nently a body adhering to the 
Conservative party. An he- 
reditary body, not subject to 
the people, could veto the people's wishes as expressed by the 
body that was representative, the House of Commons. In other 
words, the aristocratic element in the state was really more powerful 
than the democratic, the house representing a class was more power- 
ful than the house representing the people. 

The question of the budget and the question of the proper position 
and the future of the Upper Chamber were thus linked together. As 
these questions were of exceptional gravity the ministry resolved 




Herhkri' AscU'ITH 



556 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

to seek the opinion of the voters. Parliament was dissolved and 
a new election was ordered. The campaign was one of extreme 
bitterness, expressing itself in numerous acts of violence. The 
Election, election, held in January, 1910, resulted in giving the Unionists 

January, g, hundred more votes than they had had in the previous Parlia- 

ment. Yet despite this gain the Liberals would have a ma- 
jority of over a hundred in the new House of Commons if the Labor 
party and the Irish Home Rulers supported them, which they did. 

In the new Parliament the budget which had been thrown out the 
previous year was introduced again, without serious change. Again 
The budget it passed the House of Commons and went to the Lords. That 
passed House yielded this time and passed the budget with all its so- 

called revolutionary and socialistic provisions. 



THE "LORDS' VETO" 

The Liberals now turned their attention to this question of the 
"Lords' Veto," or of the position proper for an hereditary, aristocratic 
chamber in a nation that pretended to be democratic, as did England. 
The issue stated nearly twenty years before by Gladstone in his last 
speech in Parliament had now arrived at the crucial stage. What 
should be the relations between a deliberative assembly elected by 
the votes of more than six million voters and an hereditary body ? 
The question was vehemently discussed inside Parliament and out- 
side. Various suggestions for reform of the House of Lords were 
made by the members of that House itself, justly apprehensive for 
their future. The death of the popular King Edward VII (May 6, 
1910), and the accession of George V, occurring in the midst of this 
passionate campaign, somewhat sobered the combatants, though 
only temporarily. Attempts were made to see if some compromise 
regarding the future of the House of Lords might not be worked 
out by the two parties. But the attempts were futile, the issue 
being too deep and too far-reaching. 

The ministry, wishing the opinion of the people on this new ques- 
tion, dissolved the House of Commons again and ordered new elec- 
Th 1 f s tions, the second within a single year (December, 1910). The 
of December, result was that the parties came back each with practically 
^'^*' the same number of members as before. The Government's 

majority was undiminished. 



THE PARLIAMENT BILL 



557 



The Asquith ministry now passed through the House of Commons 
a ParUament Bill restricting the power of the House of Lords jhe House 
in several important particulars and providing that the House °^ Commons 
of Commons should in last resort have its way in any 
troversy with the other chamber. This bill passed the House 
of Commons by a large majority. How could it be got through 
the House of Lords ? Would the Lords be likely to vote in favor of 



passes the 
con- Parliament 
Bill 




Interior of the House of Commons 



the recognition of their inferiority to the other House, would they 
consent to this withdrawal from them of powers they had hitherto 
exercised, would they acquiesce in this altered and reduced situation 
at the hands of a chamber whose measures they had been freely 
blocking for several years ? Of course they would not if they could 
help it. But there is one way in which the opposition of the House 
of Lords can be overcome, no matter how overwhelming. The 
King can create new peers — as many as he likes — enough to over- 
come the majority against the measure in question. This supreme 
weapon the King, which of course in fact meant the Asquith minis- 



.558 



ENGLAND SINCE 1868 



try, was now prepared to use. Asquith announced that he had 
The Pariia- the Consent of George V to create enough peers to secure the 
passage of the bill in case it were necessary. The threat was 
sufificient. The Lords on August 18, 191 1, passed the Parlia- 
ment Act which so profoundly altered their own status, power, 
and prestige. This measure establishes new processes of law-making. 
Provisions If the Lords withhold their assent from a money bill, that is, 
any bill raising taxes or making appropriations, for more than 
one month after it has passed the House of Commons, the bill may 



ment Bill 
passed by 
the House 
of Lords 



of the bill 




Interior of the House of Lords 



be presented for the King's signature and on receiving it becomes 
law without the consent of the Lords. If a bill other than a money 
bill is passed by the Commons in three successive sessions, whether 
of the same Parliament or not, and is rejected by the Lords, it may 
on a third rejection by them be presented for the King's assent and 
on receiving that assent will become a law, notwithstanding the fact 
that the House of Lords has not consented to the bill — provided 



THE THIRD HOME RULE BILL 559 

that two years have elapsed between the second reading of the bill 
in the lirst of those sessions and the date on which it passes the 
Commons for the third time. 

This Parliament or Veto Bill contained another important provi- 
sion, substituting five years for seven as the maximum duration of a 
Parliament ; that is, members of the Commons are henceforth chosen 
for five, not seven years. Their term was thus reduced. 

Thus the veto power of the House of Lords is gone entirely for all 
financial legislation, and for all other legislation its veto is The Lords' 
merely suspensive. The Commons can have their way in ^^*° ^^" 
the end. They may be delayed two years. 



THIRD HOME RULE BILL 

The way was now cleared for the enactment of certain legislation 
desired by the Liberal party which could not secure the approval of 
the House of Lords. It was possible finally to pass a Home 
Rule Bill, to the principle of which the Liberal party had Home Rule 
been committed for a quarter of a century. On April 11, ^^^ i^t^o- 
1912, Asquith introduced the Third Home Rule Bill, granting 
Ireland a Parliament of her own, consisting of a Senate of 40 mem- 
bers and a House of Commons of 164. If the two houses should 
disagree, then they were to sit and vote together. On certain 
subjects the Irish Parliament should not have the right to legislate : 
on peace or war, naval or military affairs, treaties, currency, foreign 
commerce. It could not establish or endow any religion or impose 
any religious disabilities. The Irish were to be represented in the 
Parliament in London by 42 members instead of the previous 
number, 103. 

This measure was passionately opposed by the Conservative party 
and particularly by the Ulster party, Ulster being that province of 
Ireland in which the Protestants are strong. They went so far in 
their opposition as to threaten civil war, in case Ulster were opposition 
not exempted from the operation of this law. During the next °^ Ulster 
two years the battle raged around this point, in conferences between 
political leaders, in discussions in Parliament and the press. At- 
tempts at compromise failed as the Home Rule party would not 
consent to the exemption of a quarter of Ireland from the jurisdiction 
of the proposed Irish Parliament. 



56o 



ENGLAND SINCE i86S 




The Cabinet Room 
At No. lo Downing Street. 



PASSAGE OF THE HOME RULE BILL 561 

The bill was, however, passed and was immediately vetoed by the 
House of Lords. At the next session it was passed again and again 
vetoed by the Lords. Finally on May 25, 1914, it was 
passed a third time by the House of Commons by a vote of passed by 
351 to 274, a majority of 77. The bill was later rejected by the House of 
the Lords. It might now become a law without their consent, 
in conformity with the Parliament Act of 191 1. Only the formal 
assent of the King was necessary. 

But the ministry was so impressed with the vehemence and the de- 
termination of the " Ulster party," which went so far as to organize an 
army and establish a sort of provisional government, that it decided 
to continue discussions in order to see whether some compromise 
might not be arranged. These discussions were interrupted by the 
outbreak of the European War. 

Meanwhile a bill disestablishing the Anglican Church in 
Wales had gone through the same process ; had thrice been ushment of 
passed by the Commons and rejected by the Lords. Like the ^^^ Welsh 

*^ Church 

Home Rule Bill, it only awaited the signature of the sovereign. 

Finally that signature was given to both bills on September 18, 
19 14, but Parliament passed on that same day a bill suspending goth la^^g 
these laws from operation until the close of the war. suspended 

England now had far more serious things to consider and she wisely 
swept the deck clean of contentious domestic matters until a more con- 
venient season. Whether the Home Rule Act when finally put into 
force would be accompanied with amendments which would pacify 
the Protestants of Ulster, remained, of course, to be seen, or whether, 
indeed, it would ever be put into force. 



REFERENCES 

Gladstone's Personality : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. I, 
Chap. XXIV ; Morley, Gladstone, Book II, Chap. VI ; Bryce, Stiidics in Con- 
temporary Biography, pp. 400-480. 

Gladstone's First Ministry : McCarthy, Vol. II, Chaps. LVII-LXII. 

Disraeli's Mlnistry : McCarthy, Vol. II, Chaps. LXIII-LXVI ; Bryce, 
pp. 1-68. 

The Irish Land Question : McCarthy, Vol. Ill, pp. 57-82 ; Johnston and 
Spencer, Irelatid's Story, pp. 324-338. 

The Home Rule Movement: McCarthy, Vol. Ill, Chap. X, pp. 171-198; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 65-90. 



562. ENGLAND SINCE 1868 

Cabinet System of Government: Bagehot, English Constitution, Chap. 
II; Lowell, The Government of England, Chaps. I, II, III, XXII, and XXIII; 
Moran, The Theory and Practice of the English Government; Robinson and 
Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 258-266. 

England in the Twentieth Century : Larson, Short History of England, 
pp. 617-639; Cross, History of England, Chap. LVII; Hayes, British Social 
Politics; Ogg, Social Progress in Contemporary Europe, pp. 265-279 ; Cambridge 
Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 52-64. 

British Foreign Policy since 1880 : Seymour, The Diplomatic Background 
of the War, Chaps. VI and VII; Schmitt, Germany and England, Chaps. I, 
VI, VII, IX. 



CHAP'TER XXVIII 

THE BRITISH EMPIRE 

We have thus far concerned ourselves with the history of the Euro- 
pean continent. But one of the most remarkable features of the nine- 
teenth century was the reaching out of Europe for the conquest _, 

Xll6 cxpdii- 

of the world. It was not only a century of nation building sion of 
but also of empire building on a colossal scale, a century of "'"p® 
European emigration and colonization, a century during which the 
white race seized whatever regions of the earth remained still unap- 
propriated or were too weak to preserve themselves inviolate. Thus 
magnificent imperial claims were staked out by various powers either 
for immediate or for ultimate use. 

Many were the causes of this new Wandering of the Peoples. One 
was the extraordinary increase during the century of the population of 
Europe — perhaps a hundred and seventy -five millions in causes of 
1815, more than four hundred and fifty millions a century this growth 
later. This is unquestionably one of the most important facts in 
modem history, the fundamental cause of the colossal emigration. 
Another cause was the transformation of the economic system, the 
marvelous increase in the power of production, which impelled the 
producers to ransack the world for new markets and new sources of 
raw material. And another and potent cause was the spectacle of 
the British Empire which touched the imagination or aroused the 
envy of other peoples, who therefore fell to imitating, within the range 
of the possible. An examination of the histor}^ and characteristics 
of that Empire is essential to an understanding of modern Europe. 

At the close of the eighteenth century England possessed in the New 
World, the region of the St. Lawrence, New Brunswick, Nova jhe British 
Scotia, Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, and a large, Empire at the 
vague region known as the Hudson Bay territory ; Jamaica, eighteenth 
and other West Indian islands ; in Australia, a strip of the <=«°*"''y 
eastern coast ; in India, the Bengal or lower Ganges region, Bombay, 

563 



564 THE BRITISH EMPIRE 

and strips along the eastern and western coasts. The most important 
feature of her colonial policy had been her elimination of France 
as a rival, from whom she had taken in the Seven Years' War almost 
all of her North American and East Indian possessions. This 
Empire she increased during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars, 
largely at the expense- of France and Holland, the ally of France. 
Thus she acquired the Cape of Good Hope, Guiana in South America, 
Tobago, Trinidad, and St. Lucia, Mauritius in the Indian Ocean, 
and the large island of Ceylon. In the Mediterranean she acquired 
Malta. She also obtained Helgoland, and the protectorate of the 
Ionian Islands. 

Since 1815 her Empire has been vastly augmented by a long 
Vast series of wars, and by the natural advance of her colonists over 

growth of countries contiguous to the early settlements, as in Canada 
Empire'^ ^^^ Australia. Her Empire lies in every quarter of the 

since 1815 globe. 

INDIA 

The acquisition of India, a world in itself, for the British Crown was 
the work of a private commercial organization, the East India Com- 
pany, which was founded in the sixteenth century and given a mo- 
nopoly of the trade with India. This company established trading 
stations in various parts of that peninsula. Coming into conflict 
with the French, and mixing in the quarrels of the native princes, 
it succeeded in winning direct control of large sections, and indirect 
control of others by assuming protectorates over certain of the 
princes, who allied themselves with the English and were left on their 
thrones. This commercial company became invested with the 
government of these acquisitions, under the provisions of laws passed 
by the English Parliament at various times. In the nineteenth 
century the area of British control steadily widened, until it 
Overthrow became complete. Its progress was immensely furthered by 
^i *u^ .. the overthrow, after a long and intermittent war, of the 

Mahratta ' ° ' 

confederacy Mahratta confederacy, a loose union of Indian princes domi- 
nating central and western India. This confederacy was 
finally conquered in a war which lasted from 1816 to 1818, when a 
large part of its territories were added directly to the English pos- 
sessions, and other parts were left under their native rulers, who, 
however, were brought effectively under English control by being 



THE EMPIRE OF INDIA 565 

obliged to conform to English policy, to accept English Residents 
at their courts, whose advice they were practically compelled to 
follow, and by putting their native armies under British direction. 
Such is the condition of many of them at the present day. 

The English also advanced to the north and northwest, from 
Bengal. One of their most important annexations was that of the 
Punjab, an immense territory on the Indus, taken as a result Annexation 
of two difficult wars (1845 to 1849), and the Oudh province, of the 
one of the richest sections of India, lying between the Punjab ""■'* 
and Bengal, annexed in 1856. 

The steady march of English conquest aroused a bitter feeling of 
hostility to the English, which came to a head in the famous Sepoy 
Mutiny of 1857, which for a time threatened the complete ^j^g g 
overthrow of the British in northern India. This mutiny was. Mutiny - 
however, speedily suppressed. Since then no attempts have ^'^^ 
been made to overthrow English control. 

One important consequence of the mutiny of 1857 was that in 
1858 the government of India was transferred to the Crown 
from the private company which had conducted it for a century. It 
passed under the direct authority of England. In 1876, as we have 
seen, India was declared an empire, and Queen Victoria assumed 
the title Empress of India, January i, 1877. This act was officially 
announced in India by Lord Lytton, the Viceroy, to an imposing 
assembly of the ruling princes. 

An Empire it surely is, with its three hundred and fifteen million 
inhabitants. A Viceroy stands at the head of the government. 
There is a Secretary for India in the British Ministry. The 
government is largely carried on by the highly organized ment^and"^"' 
Civil Service of India, and is in the hands of about eleven population 

or India 

hundred Englishmen. About two hundred and forty-four 
millions of people are under the direct control of Great Britain ; 
about seventy millions live in native states under native rulers, the 
"Protected Princes of India," of whom there were, a few years ago, 
nearly seven hundred. For all practical purposes, however, these 
princes must follow the advice of English officials, or Residents, 
stationed in their capitals. 

Not only did England complete her control of India in the nine- 
teenth century, but she added countries round about India, Burma 
toward the east, and, toward the west, Baluchistan, a part of 



566 THE BRITISH EMPIRE 

which was annexed outright, and the remainder brought under a 

protectorate. She also imposed a kind of protectorate upon Af- 

Burma and ghanistan as a result of two Afghan wars (1839- 1842 and 

Baluchistan 1878-1880). 

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA 

In 1 8 15, as already stated, Great Britain possessed, in North 
America, six colonies : Upper Canada, Lower Canada, New Bruns- 
wick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland ; and 
the Hudson Bay Company's territories stretched to the north and 
northwest with undefined boundaries. The total population of 
these colonies was about 460,000. The colonies were entirely 
separate from each other. Each had its own government, and its 
relations were not with the others, but with England. The oldest 
and most populous was Lower Canada, which included Montreal and 
Quebec and the St. Lawrence valley. This was the French colony 
conquered by England in 1763. Its population was French-speaking, 
and Roman Catholic in religion. 

The two most important of these colonies were Lower Canada, 

largely French, and Upper Canada, entirely English. Each had re- 

„ , ceived a constitution in 1791, but in neither colony did the con- 

Upper and / ^ > j 

Lower stitution work well and the fundamental reason was that 

Canada neither the people nor their legislatures had any control over 

the executive. The Governor, who could practically veto all legis- 
lation, considered himself responsible primarily to the English 
Government, not to the people of the province. England had not yet 
learned the secret of successful management of colonies despite the 
fact that the lesson of the American Revolution and the loss of the 
thirteen colonies half a century earlier was sufficiently plain. It 
took a second revolt to point the moral and adorn the tale. In 1837 
disaffection had reached such a stage that revolutionary movements 
broke out in both Upper and Lower Canada. These were easily 
suppressed by the Canadian authorities without help from England, 
but the grievances of the colonists still remained. 

The English Government, thoroughly alarmed at the danger of the 

loss of another empire, adopted the part of discretion and sent out to 

The Durham Canada a commissioner to study the grievances of the colo- 

Mission nists. The man chosen was Lord Durham, whose part in the 

reform of 1832 had been brilliant. Durham was in Canada five 



THE DOMINION OF CANADA 567 

months. The report in which he analyzed the causes of the rebellion 
and suggested changes in policy entitles him to the rank of the 
greatest colonial statesman in British history. In a word he adopted 
the dictum of Fox, who had said "the only method of retaining distant 
colonies with advantage, is to enable them to govern themselves." 
He proposed the introduction of the cabinet system of government as 
worked out in England. This gives the popular house of the legis- 
lature control over the executive. 

Durham's recommendations were not immediately followed, as to 
many Englishmen they seemed to render the colonies independent. 
Ten years later, however, this principle of ministerial respon- 
sibility was adopted by Lord Elgin (1847), the Governor of responsibUity 
Canada and the son-in-law of Durham. His example was fol- Introduced 

^ into Canada 

lowed by his successors and gradually became established usage. 
The custom spread rapidly to the other colonies of Great Britain 
which were of English stock and were therefore considered capable 
of self-government. This is the cement that holds the British Em- 
pire together. For self-government has brought with it contentment. 

Lord Durham had also suggested a federation of all the North 
American colonies. This was brought about in 1867 when the British 
North America Act, which had been drawn up in Canada and ^j^g founding 
which expressed Canadian sentiment, was passed without of the 
change by the English Parliament. By this act Upper and Canada, 
Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick were joined '^^'^ 
into a confederation called the Dominion of' Canada. There was 
to be a central or federal parliament sitting in Ottawa. There were 
also to be local or provincial legislatures in each province to legislate 
for local affairs. Questions affecting the whole Dominion were 
reserved for the Dominion Parliament. 

The central or Dominion Parliament was to consist of a Senate and 
a House of Commons. The Senate was to be composed of seventy 
members nominated for life by the Governor-General, himself .^j^^ 
appointed by the monarch, and representing the Crown. Dominion 
The House of Commons was to be elected by the people. 
In some respects the example of the English Government was fol- 
lowed in the constitution, in others that of the United States. 

Though the Dominion began with only four provinces provision 
was made for the possible admission of others. Manitoba Growth of 
was admitted in 1870, British Columbia in 1871, Prince the Dominion 
Edward Island in 1873. 



568 



THE BRITISH EMPIRE 




THE DOMINION OF CANADA 569 

In 1846, by the settlement of the Oregon dispute, the hne dividing 
the English possessions from the United States was extended to the 
Pacific Ocean, and in 1869 the Dominion acquired by pur- Canada 
chase (£300,000) the vast territories belonging to the Hudson practicaUy 
Bay Company, out of which the great provinces of Alberta and ^^ ^^^° 
Saskatchewan have been carved and admitted into the union (1905). 
The Dominion now includes all of British North America except 
the island of Newfoundland, which has steadily refused to join. 
It thus extends from ocean to ocean. Except for the fact that she 
receives a Governor-General from England and that she possesses 
no treat}^ powers, Canada is practically independent. She manages 
her own affairs, and even imposes tariffs which are disadvantageous 
to the mother country. That she has imperial as well as local 
patriotism, however, was shown strikingly in her support of England 
in the South African war. She sent Canadian regiments thither at 
her own expense to cooperate in an enterprise not closely connected 
with her own fortunes. The same spirit, the same willingness to 
make costly sacrifices, were to be shown, on a larger scale, in the war 
that began in 1914. 

The founding of the Canadian union in 1867 rendered possible the 
construction of a great transcontinental railway, the Canadian Pacific, 
built between 1881 and 1885. This has in turn reacted upon 
the Dominion,' binding the different provinces together and Canadian 
contributing to the remarkable development of the west. Pacific 

^ . Rauway 

Another transcontinental railway has recently been built 
farther to the north. Canada is connected by steamship lines with 
Europe and with Japan and Australia. Her population has increased 
from less than five hundred thousand in 1815 to more than seven 
million. Her prosperity has grown immensely, and her economic 
life is becoming more varied. Largely an agricultural and timber 
producing country, her manufactures are now developing under the 
stimulus of protective tariffs, and her vast mineral resources are in 
process of rapid development. 



AUSTRALIA 

In the Southern Hemisphere, too, a new empire was created by 
Great Britain during the nineteenth century, an empire nearly as 
extensive territorially as the United States or Canada, about three- 



570 THE BRITISH EMPIRE 

fourths as large as Europe, and inhabited almost entirely by a 
population of English descent. 

No systematic exploration of this southern continent, Terra Aus- 

tralis, was undertaken until toward the close of the eighteenth cen- 

Eariy tury, but certain parts had been sighted or traced much earlier 

explorations j^y Spanish, Portuguese, and particularly by Dutch navigators. 

Among the last, Tasman is to be mentioned, who in 1642 explored 

the southeastern portion, though he did not discover that the land 

which was later to bear his name was an island, a fact not known, 

indeed, for a century and a half. He discovered the islands to the 

east of Australia, and gave to them a Dutch name. New Zealand. 

The Dutch called the Terra Australis New Holland, claiming it by 

right of discovery. But they made no attempt to occupy it. The 

^^ attention of the English was first directed thither by the 

The voyages ° -' 

of Captain famous Captain Cook, who made three voyages to this region 
°° between 1768 and 1779. Cook sailed around New Zealand, 

and then along the eastern coast of this New Holland. He put 
into a certain harbor, which was forthwith named Botany Bay, so 
varied was the vegetation on the shores. Sailing up the eastern 
coast, he claimed it all for George III, and called it New South Wales 
because it reminded him of the Welsh coast. Seventeen years, how- 
ever, went by before any settlement was made. 

At first Australia was considered by English statesmen a good 
place to which to send criminals, and it was as a convict colony that 
A convict the new empire began. The first expedition for the colonization 
colony of the country sailed from England in May, 1787, with 750 

convicts on board, and reached Botany Bay in January, 1788. Here 
the first settlement was made, and to it was given the name of the 
colonial secretary of the day, Sydney. For many years fresh cargoes 
of convicts were sent out, who, on the expiration of their sentences, 
received lands. Free settlers came too, led to emigrate by various 
periods of economic depression at home, by promises of land and 
food, and by an increasing knowledge of the adaptability of the new 
continent to agriculture, and particularly to sheep raising. By 1820 
the population was not far from 40,000. During the first thirty 
years the government was military in character. 

The free settlers were strongly opposed to having Australia re- 
garded as a prison for English convicts, and after 1840 the system 
was gradually abolished. Australia was at first mainly a pastoral 



THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 571 

country, producing wool and hides. But, in 1851 and 1852, rich 
deposits of gold were found, rivaled only by those discovered a 
little earlier in California. A tremendous immigration en- xhe discov- 
sued. The population of the colony of Victoria (cut off from ^"^ °* sold 
New South Wales) increased from 70,000 to more than 300,000 in 
five years. Australia has ever since remained one of the great gold- 
producing countries of the world. 

Thus there gradually grew up six colonies, New South Wales, 
Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, and the 
neighboring island of Tasmania. These were gradually „. . 
invested with self-government, parliaments, and responsible Australian 
ministries in the fashion worked out in Canada. The popula- *^° °^^^^ 
tion increased steadily, and by the end of the century numbered 
about four millions. 

The great political event in the history of these colonies was their 
union into a confederation at the close of the century. Up to that 
time the colonies had been legally unconnected with each other, and 
their only form of union was the loose one under the British „ 

•' Reasons for 

Crown. For a long time there was discussion as to the advis- their 
ability of binding them more closely together. Various ^ oration 
reasons contributed to convince the Australians of the advantages 
of federation ; the desirability of uniform legislation concerning 
commercial and industrial matters, railway regulation, navigation, 
irrigation, and tariffs. Moreover the desire for nationality, which 
accomplished such remarkable changes in , Europe in the 
nineteenth century, was also active here. An Australian the^Aus°rai- 
patriotism had grown up. Australians desired to make '^^ ^°^' 
their country the dominant authority in the Southern Hemi- 
sphere. They longed for a larger outlook than that given by the 
life of the separate colonies, and thus both reason and sentiment 
combined toward the same end, a close union, the creation of another 
"colonial nation." 

Union was finally achieved after ten years of earnest discussion 
(1890- 1 900). The various experiments in federation were carefully 
studied, particularly the constitutions of the United States and 
Canada. The draft of the constitution was worked over by several 
conventions, by the ministers and the governments of the various 
colonies, and was finally submitted to the people for ratification. 
Ratification being secured, the constitution was then passed through 



572 



THE BRITISH EMPIRE 




THE DOMINION OF NEW ZEALAND 573 

the British ParUament under the title of "The Commonwealth of 
Australia Constitution Act" (1900). The constitution was the 
work of the Australians. The part taken by England was simply one 
of acceptance. Though Parliament made certain suggestions of 
detail, it did not insist upon them in the case of Australian op- 
position. 

The constitution established a federation consisting of the six col- 
onies which were henceforth to be called states, not provinces as in 
the case of Canada. It created a federal Parliament of two The Federal 
houses, a Senate consisting of six senators from each state. Parliament 
and a House of Representatives apportioned among the several states 
according to population. The powers given to the Federal Govern- 
ment were carefully defined. The new system was inaugurated 
January i, 1901. 

NEW ZEALAND 

Not included in the new commonwealth is an important group of 
islands of Australasia called New Zealand, situated 1,200 miles east of 
Australia. England began to have some connection with these 
islands shortly after 181 5, but it was not until 1839 that they were 
formally annexed to the British Empire. In 1854 New Zealand was 
given responsible government, and in 1865 was entirely separated 
from New South Wales and made a separate colony. Emigration 
was methodically encouraged. New Zealand was never a convict 
colony. Population increased and it gradually became the most 
democratic colony of the Empire. In 1907 the designation of the 
colony was changed to the Dominion of New Zealand. 

New Zealand consists of two main islands with many smaller ones. 
It is about a fourth larger than Great Britain and has a population of 
over 1,000,000, of whom about 50,000 are aborigines, the New 
Maoris. Its capital is Wellington, with a population of Zealand 
about 100,000. Auckland is another important city. New Zealand is 
an agricultural and grazing country, and also possesses rich mineral 
deposits, including gold. 

New Zealand is of great interest to the world of to-day because of 
its experiments in advanced social reform, legislation concerning labor 
and capital, landowning and commerce. State control has been ex- 
tended over more branches of industry than has been the case in any 
other country. 



574 THE BRITISH EMPIRE 

The Government owns and operates the railways. The roads are 
run, not for profit, but for service to the people. As rapidly as 
^ profits exceed three per cent, passenger and freight rates are 
social reduced. Comprehensive and successful attempts are made 

legislation ^^ ^^^^ j^^ rates to induce the people in congested districts 
to live in the country. Workmen going in and out travel about three 
miles for a cent. Children in the primary grades in schools are 
carried free, and those in higher grades at very low fares. 

The Government also owns and operates the telegraphs and tele- 
phones and conducts postal savings banks. Life insurance is largely 
in its hands. It has a fire and accident insurance department. In 
1903 it began the operation of some state coal mines. Its land legis- 
lation is remarkable. Its main purpose is to prevent the land from 
being monopolized by a few, and to enable the people to become 
landholders. In 1892 progressive taxation on the large estates was 
adopted, and in 1896 the sale of such estates to the government was 
made compulsory, and thus extensive areas have come under govern- 
ment ownership. The state transfers them under various forms of 
System of tenure to the landless and working classes. The system of 
taxation taxation, based on the principle of graduation, higher rates for 

larger incomes, properties, and inheritances, is designed to break up 
or prevent monopoly and to favor the small proprietor or producer. 
In industrial and labor legislation New Zealand has also made radi- 
cal experiments. Arbitration in labor disputes is compulsory if either 
side invokes it, and the decision is binding. Factory laws are strin- 
gent, aiming particularly at the protection of women, the elimination 
of "sweating." In stores the Saturday half -holiday is universal. 
The Government has a Labor Department whose head is a member 
Old-age of the cabinet. Its first duty is to find work for the unem- 

pensions ployed, and its great effort is to get the people out of the cities 

into the country. There is an Old-Age Pension Law, enacted in 1 898 
and amended in 1905, providing pensions of about a hundred and 
twenty-five dollars for all men and women after the age of sixty-five 
whose income is less than five dollars a week. 

All this governmental activity rests on a democratic basis. There 
are no property qualifications for voting, and women have the suffrage 
as well as men. The referendum has been adopted. 

The Australian colony of Victoria has enacted much legislation re- 
sembling that described in the case of New Zealand. 



THE BEGLXNINGS OF AN AFRICAN EMPIRE 575 

BRITISH SOUTH AFRICA 

As an incident in the wars against Napoleonic France and her ally 
and dependent, Holland, England seized the Dutch possession in 
South Africa, Cape Colony. This colony she retained in 18 14, 
together with certain Dutch possessions in South America, paying acqukes 
six million pounds as compensation. This was the beginning ^^p^ 
of English expansion into Africa, which was to attain remark- 
able proportions before the close of the century. The population 
at the time England took possession consisted of about 27,000 people 
of European descent, mostly Dutch, and of about 30,000 African and 
Malay slaves owned by the Dutch, and about 17,000 Hottentots. 
Immigration of Englishmen began forthwith. 

Friction between the Dutch (called Boers, i.e. peasants) and the 
English was not slow in developing. The forms of local government 
to which the Boers were accustomed were abolished and new ^ . ,. 

Friction 

ones established. English was made the sole language used with the 
in the courts. The Boers, irritated by these measures, were ^"^"^^ 
rendered indignant by the abolition of slavery in 1834. They did 
not consider slavery wrong. Moreover, they felt defrauded of their 
propert}^ as the compensation given was inadequate — about three 
million pounds — little more than a third of what they considered 
their slaves were worth. 

The Boers resolved to leave the colony and to settle in the interior 
where they could live unmolested by the intruders. This migration 
or Great Trek began in 1836, and continued for several years. The Great 
About 10,000 Boers thus withdrew from Cape Colony. Rude "^^^^ 
carts drawn by several pairs of oxen transported their families and 
their possessions into the wilderness. The result was the founding 
of two independent Boer republics to the north of Cape Colony, 
namely the Orange Free State and the Transvaal or South African 
Republic. Theirs was to be a most checkered career. The Orange 
Free State was declared annexed to the British Empire in 1848 but 
it rebelled and its independence was recognized by Great Britain in 
1854. From that time until 1899 it pursued a peaceful course, its 
independence not infringed. 

The independence of the Transvaal was also recognized, in 1852. 
But twenty-five years later, in 1877, under the strongly imperialistic 
ministry of Lord Beaconsfield, it was abruptly declared annexed to 



576 



THE BRITISH EMPIRE 



The 

Transvaal 
annexed to 
the British 
Empire 



the British Empire, on the ground that its independence was a 
menace to the peace of England's other South African pos- 
sessions. The Boers' hatred of the English naturally ex- 
pressed itself and they took up arms in the defense of their 
independence. 
In i88p Lord Beaconsfield was overthrown and Gladstone came 

into power. Gladstone had denounced the annexation, and was 







^ ^ 



Majuba Hill 

convinced that a mistake had been made which must be rectified. He 
was negotiating with the Boer leaders, hoping to reach, by peaceful 
means, a solution that would be satisfactory to both sides, when his 
problem was made immensely more difficult by the Boers themselves, 
who, in December, 1880, rose in revolt and defeated a small detach- 
Majuba ment of British troops at Majuba Hill, February 27, 1881. 

In a military sense this so-called battle of Majuba Hill was 
an insignificant affair, but its effects upon Englishmen and Boers 
were tremendous and far-reaching. Gladstone, who had already 
been negotiating with a view to restoring the independence of the 
Transvaal, which he considered had been unjustly overthrown, did 
not think it right to reverse his policy because of a mere skirmish, 



Hill 



THE ENGLISH AND THE TRANSVAAL 577 

however humiliating. His ministry therefore went its way, not 
beheving that it should be deflected from an act of justice and 
conciliation merely because of a military misfortune of no 
importance in itself. The independence of the Transvaal Gladstone 
was formally recognized with the restriction that it could not administra- 
make treaties with foreign countries without the approval of 
Great Britain and with the proviso, which was destined to gain tremen- 
dous importance later, that "white men were to have full liberty to re- 
side in any part of the republic, to trade in it, and to be liable to the 
same taxes only as those exacted from citizens of the republic." 

Gladstone's action was severely criticized by Englishmen who did 
not believe in retiring, leaving a defeat unavenged. They denounced 
the policy of the ministry as hostile to the welfare of the South 
African colonies and damaging to the prestige of the Empire. The 
Boers, on the other hand, considered that they had won their inde- 
pendence by arms, by the humiliation of the traditional enemy, and 
were accordingly elated. In holding this opinion they were injuring 
themselves by self-deception and by the idea that what they had 
done once they could do again, and they were angering the British 
by keeping alive the memory of Majuba Hill. The phrase just 
quoted, concerning immigration, contained the germ of future 
trouble, which in the end was to result in the violent overthrow of 
the republic, for a momentous change in the character of the popula- 
tion was impending. 

The South African Republic was entirely inhabited by Boers, a 
people exclusively interested in agriculture and grazing, solid, sturdy, 
religious, freedom-loving, but, in the modern sense, unpro- 
gressive, ill-educated, suspicious of foreigners, and particularly 
of Englishmen. The peace and contentment of this rural people 
were disturbed by the discovery, in 1884, that gold in immense 
quantities lay hidden in their mountains, the Rand. Immediately 
a great influx of miners and speculators began. These were chiefly 
Englishmen. In the heart of the mining district the city of The 
Johannesburg grew rapidly, numbering in a few years over uitianders 
100,000 inhabitants, a city of foreigners. Troubles quickly arose 
between the native Boers and the aggressive, energetic Uitlanders or 
foreigners. 

The Uitlanders gave wide publicity to their grievances. Great ob- 
stacles were put in the way of their naturalization ; they were given 



578 



THE BRITISH EMPIRE 



The 

Jameson 

Raid 



no share in the government, not even the right to vote. Yet in parts 
of the Transvaal they were more numerous than the natives, and 
bore the larger share of taxation. In addition they were forced to 
render military service, which, in their opinion, implied citizenship. 
They looked to the British Government to push their demand for 
reforms. The Boer Government was undoubtedly an oligarchy, 
but the Boers felt that it was only by refusing the suffrage to the 
unwelcome intruders that 
they could keep con- 
trol of their own state, 
which at the cost of 
much hardship they had cre- 
ated in the wilderness. In 
1895 occurred an event which 
deeply embittered them, the 
Jameson Raid — an invasion 
of the Transvaal by a few 
hundred troopers under Dr. 
Jameson, the administrator 
of Rhodesia, with the appar- 
ent purpose of overthrowing 
the Boer Government. The 
raiders were easily captured 
by the Boers, who, with great 
magnanimity, handed them 
over to England. This inde- 
fensible attack and the fact 
that the guilty were only 

lightly punished in England, and that the man whom all Boers held 
responsible as the arch-conspirator, Cecil Rhodes, was shielded by the 
British Government, entered like iron into the souls of the Boers and 
only hardened their resistance to the demands of the Uitlanders. 
These demands were refused and the grievances of the Uitlanders, 
who now outnumbered the natives perhaps two to one, continued. 
Friction steadily increased. The British charged that the Boers 
were aiming at nothing less than the ultimate expulsion of the English 
from South Africa, the Boers charged that the British were aiming 
at the extinction of the two Boer republics. There was no spirit of 
conciliation in either government. 




Joseph Chamberlain 



THE ENGLISH AND THE BOERS AT WAR 



579 



THE SOUTH AFRICAN WAR 

Joseph Chamberlain, British Colonial Secretary, was arrogant and 
insolent. Paul Kruger, President of the Transvaal, was obstinate and 
ill-informed. Ultimately in October, 1899, the Boers declared war 
upon Great Britain. The 
Orange Free State, no party 
to the quarrel, threw in its lot 
with its sister Boer republic. 

This war was lightly entered 
upon by both sides. Each 
grossly underestimated both 
the resources and the spirit of 
the other. The English Gov- 
ernment had made no prepara- 
tion at all adequate, appar- 
ently not believing that in the 
end this petty state would 
dare oppose the mighty British 
Empire. The Boers, on the 
other hand, had been long pre- 
paring for a conflict, and knew 
that the number of British 
troops in South Africa was 
small, totally insufhcient to 
put down their resistance. 
Moreover, for years they had 
deceived themselves with a gross exaggeration of the significance of 
Majuba Hill as a victory over the British. Each side believed that 
the war would be short, and would result in its favor. 

The war, which they supposed would be over in a few months, 
lasted for nearly three years. England suffered at the outset many 
humiliating reverses. The war was not characterized by great 
battles, but by many sieges at first, and then by guerrilla fighting 
and elaborate, systematic, and difhcult conquest of the country. It 
was fought with great bravery on both sides. For the English, 
Lord Roberts and Lord Kitchener were the leaders, and of the Boers 
several greatly distinguished themselves, obtaining world-wide 
reputations, Christian de Wet, Louis Botha, Delarey. 




Paul Kruger 



580 



THE BRITISH EMPIRE 



The English won in the end by sheer force of numbers and peace 
Victory of was finally concluded on June i, 1902. The Transvaal and 
the English ^\^q Orange Free State lost their independence, and became 
colonies of the British Empire. Otherwise the terms offered by 
Annexation ^^^ conqucrors Were liberal. Generous money grants and 
of the Trans- loans Were to be made by England to enable the Boers to 
Orange Free begin again in their sadly devastated land. Their language 
State ^^5 j-Q be respected wherever possible. 

The work of reconciliation proceeded with remarkable rapidity 
after the close of the war. Responsible government, that is, self- 
government, was granted to 
the Transvaal Colony in 1906 
and to the Orange River 
Colony in 1907. This liberal 
conduct of the English Gov- 
ernment had the most happy 
consequences, as was shown 
very convincingly by the 
spontaneity and the strength 
of the movement for closer 
union, which culminated in 
1909 in the creation of a new 
"colonial nation" within the 
British Empire. In 1908 a 
convention was held in which 
the four colonies were repre- 
sented. The outcome of its 
deliberations, which lasted 
several months, was the draft 
of a constitution for the South 
African Union. This was then 
submitted to the colonies for 
approval and, by June, 1909, had been ratified by them all. The 
constitution was in the form of a statute to be enacted by the 
British Parliament. It became law September 20, 1909. 
The South ^^^ South African Union was the work of the South Africans 

African themselvcs, the former enemies, Boers and British, harmoni- 

ously cooperating. The central government consists of a 
Governor-General appointed by the Crown ; an Executive Council ; 




Lord Roberts 



THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA 581 

a Senate and a House of Assembly. Both Dutch and Enghsh are 
official languages and enjoy equal privileges. Difficulty was ex- 
perienced in selecting the capital, so intense was the rivalry pf dif- 
ferent cities. The result was a compromise. Pretoria was chosen as 
the seat of the executive branch of the government, Cape Town as 
the seat of the legislative branch. 

The creation of the South African Union was but another triumph 
of the spirit of nationality which has so greatly transformed the 
world since 1815. The new commonwealth has a population of 
about 1,150,000 whites and more than 6,000,000 people of non- 
European descent. Provision has been made for the ultimate 
admission of Rhodesia into the Union. 

IMPERIAL FEDERATION 

At the opening of the twentieth century Great Britain possessed an 
empire far more extensive and far more populous than any the world 
had ever seen, covering about thirteen millions of square ^^^ ^ 
miles, if Egypt and the Soudan were included, with a total flung British 
population of over four hundred and twenty millions; This ^"f''^ 
Empire is scattered ever5rwhere, in Asia, Africa, Australasia, the 
two Americas, and the islands of the seven seas. The population 
includes a motley host of peoples. Only fifty-four million are 
English-speaking, and of these about forty-two million live in Great 
Britain. Most of the colonies are self-supporting. They present 
every form of government, military, autocratic, representative, 
democratic. The sea alone binds the Empire. England's throne 
is on the mountain wave in a literal as well as in a metaphorical sense. 
Dominance of the oceans is essential that she may keep open her 
communications with her far-flung colonies. It is no accident that 
England is the greatest sea-power of the world, and intends to 
remain such. She regards this as the very vital principle of her 
imperial existence. 

A noteworthy feature of the British Empire, as already sufficiently 
indicated, is the practically unlimited self-government enjoyed by 
several of the colonies, those in which the English stock predominates, 
Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand. This policy is in 
contrast to that pursued by the French and German governments, 
which have ruled their colonies directly from Paris and Berlin. But 



582 THE BRITISH EMPIRE 

this system does not apply to the greatest of them all, India, nor 
to a multitude of smaller possessions. 

A question much and earnestly discussed during the last twenty- 
five years is that of Imperial Federation. May not some machinery 
be developed, some method be found, whereby the vast em- 
of Imperial pire may be more closely consolidated, and for certain pur- 
Federation poses act as a single state? If so, its power will be greatly 
augmented, and the world will witness the most stupendous achieve- 
ment in the art of government recorded in its history. The creation 
of such a Greater Britain has seized, in recent years, the imagination 
of many thoughtful statesmen. That the World War will have con- 
tributed to the solution of this problem seems a reasonable expectation. 
For that war has shown the existence of an intense imperial patriot- 
ism among Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans, 
and apparently even Indians, all rushing instinctively to support 
the mother country in her hour of need, all evidently willing to give 
the last full measure of devotion to a cause which they regard as 
common to them all. So powerful a spirit may well find a way 
of embodying and crystallizing itself in permanent political institu- 
tions. The sense of unity, indisputably revealed, may well be the 
harbinger of a coming organization adapted to preserve and foster 
that sense and to develop it more richly still. 

REFERENCES 

A Century of Empire: Pollard, History of England (Home University 
Library), pp. 199-225; Cheyney, Short History of England, pp. 649-653, 666- 
678. 

The Indian Mutiny : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. II, Chaps. 
XXXII-XXXV ; Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 638-644. 

British Expansion in India : Woodward, The Expansion of the British 
Empire, pp. 312-330; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII^ Chap. XVI, pp. 

457-499- 

Canada : McCarthy, Vol. I, Chap. Ill; Woodward, pp. 249-261 ; Bourinot, 
Canada under British Rule. 

Australia: Woodward, pp. 262-274; Beard, pp. 645-662 ; 'Qryce, Studies 
in History and Jurisprudence (Constitution of Australia) ; Jenks, History of the 
A ustralasian Colonies. 

South Africa : Woodward, pp. 269-285 ; Bright, History of England, Vol. 
V, pp. 234-266; Bryce, Impressions of South Africa, pp. 99-182. 



CHAPTER XXIX 

THE PARTITION' OF AFRICA 

Lying almost within sight of Europe and forming the southern 
boundary of her great inland sea is the immense continent, three 
times the size of Europe, whose real nature was revealed only .^ . ,^ 

. ■' Africa three 

in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In some re- times the size 
spects the seat of very ancient history, in most its history is °^ Europe 
just beginning. In Egypt a rich and advanced civilization appeared 
in very early times along the lower valley of the Nile. Yet only after 
thousands of years and only in our own day have the sources and 
the upper course of that famous river been discovered. Along the 
northern coasts arose the civilization and state of Carthage, rich, 
mj^sterious, and redoubtable, for a while the powerful rival of Rome, 
succumbing to the latter only after severe and memorable struggles. 
The ancient world knew therefore the northern shores of xhe period 
Africa. The rest was practically unknown. In the fifteenth °^ discovery 
century came the great series of geographical discoveries, which 
immensely widened the known boundaries of the world. Among 
other things they revealed the hitherto unknown outline and magni- 
tude of the continent. But its great inner mass remained as before, 
unexplored, and so it remained until well into the nineteenth century. 
In 1 815 the situation was as follows : the Turkish Empire extended 
along the whole northern coast to Morocco, that is, the Sultan was 
nominally sovereign of Egypt, Tripoli, Tunis, and Algeria, situation 
Morocco was independent under its own sultan. Along ■'» ^^'s 
the western coasts were scattered settlements, or rather stations, of 
England, France, Denmark, Holland, Spain, and Portugal. Portugal 
had certain claims on the eastern coast, opposite Madagascar. 
England had just acquired the Dutch Cape Colony whence, as we 
have seen, her expansion into a great South African power has pro- 
ceeded. The interior of the continent was unknown, and was of 
interest only to geographers. 

583 



584 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA 

For sixty years after 18 15, progress in the appropriation of Africa 

by Europe was slow. The most important annexation was that of 

Algeria by France between 1830 and 1847. In the south, Eng- 

conquest of land was spreading out, and the Boers were founding their 

Algeria ^^q republips. 

EXPLORATIONS IN AFRICA 

European annexation waited upon exploration. Africa was the 
"Dark Continent," and until the darkness was lifted it was not 
coveted. About the middle of the century the darkness began to 
disappear. Explorers penetrated farther and farther into the 
interior, traversing the continent in various directions, opening a 
chapter of geographical discovery of absorbing interest. It is 
impossible within our limits to do more than allude to the wonderful 
work participated in by many intrepid explorers, Englishmen, 
Frenchmen, Portuguese, Dutch, Germans, and Belgians. A few 
incidents only can be mentioned. 

It was natural that Europeans should be curious about the sources 
of the Nile, a river famous since the dawn of history, but whose source 
The sources remained enveloped in obscurity. In 1858 one source was 
of the Nile found by Speke, an English explorer, to consist of a great 
lake south of the equator, to which the name Victoria Nyanza was 
given. Six years later another Englishman, Sir Samuel Baker, dis- 
covered another lake, also a source, and named it Albert Nyanza. 

Two names particularly stand out in this record of African explora- 
tion, Livingstone and Stanley. David Livingstone, a Scotch mis- 
David sionary and traveler, began his African career in 1 840, and 
Livingstone continued it until his death in 1873. He traced the course 
of the Zambesi River, of the upper Congo, and the region round about 
Lakes Tanganyika (tan-gan-ye'-ka) and Nyassa. He crossed Africa 
from sea to sea. He opened up a new country to the world. His 
explorations caught the attention of Europe, and when, on one of 
his journeys, Europe thought that he was lost or dead, and an 
expedition was sent out to find him, that expedition riveted the 
attention of Europe as no other in African history had done. It was 
under the direction of Henry M. Stanley, sent out by the 
New York Herald. Stanley's story of how he found Living- 
stone was read with the greatest interest in Europe, and heightened 
the desire, already widespread, for more knowledge about the great 



STANLEY'S EXPLORATIONS 585 

continent. Livingstone, whose name is the most important in the 
history of African exploration, died in 1873. His body was borne 
with all honor to England and given the burial of a national hero 
in Westminster Abbey. 

By this time not only was the scientific curiosity of Europe thor- 
oughly aroused, but missionary zeal saw a new field for activity. 
Thus Stanley's journey across Africa, from 1874 to 1878, was ^^^^ ,^ 
followed in Europe with an attention unparalleled in the his- explorations 
tory of modern explorations. Stanley explored the equatorial ^J^^^ 
lake region, making important additions to knowledge. His 
great work was, however, his exploration of the Congo River 
system. Little had been known of this river save its lower 
course as it approached the sea. Stanley proved that it was 
one of the largest rivers in the world, that its length was more 
than three thousand miles, that it was fed by an enormous 
number of tributaries, that it drained an area of over 1,300,000 
square miles, that in the volume of its waters it was only exceeded 
by the Amazon. 



AFRICA APPROPRIATED BY EUROPE 

Thus, by 1880, the scientific enthusiasm and curiosity, the mis- 
sionary and philanthropic zeal of Europeans, the hatred of slave 
hunters who plied their trade in the interior, had solved the great 
mystery of Africa. The map showed rivers -and lakes where pre- 
viously all had been blank. 

Upon discovery quickly followed appropriation. France entered 
upon her protectorate of Tunis in 1881, England upon her "occupa- 
tion" of Egypt in 1882. This was a signal for a general j^e parti- 
scramble. A feverish period of partition succeeded the long, tion of Africa 
slow one of discovery. European powers swept down upon ^ ""^"^^ 
this continent lying at their very door, hitherto neglected and 
despised, and carved it up among themselves. This they did without 
recourse to war by a series of treaties among themselves, defining the 
boundaries of their claims. Africa became an annex of Europe. 
Out of this rush for territories the great powers, England, France, 
and Germany, naturally emerged with the largest acquisitions, but 
Portugal and Italy each secured a share. The situation and relative 
extent of these may best be appreciated by an examination of the 



586 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA 

map. Most of the treaties by which this division was affected were 
made between 1884 and 1890. 

One feature of this appropriation of Africa by Europe was the 
foundation of the Congo Free State. This was the work of the 
The Congo second King of Belgium, Leopold II, a man who was greatly 
Free State interested in the exploration of that continent. After the 
discoveries of Livingstone, and the early ones of Stanley, he called a 
conference of the powers in 1 876. As a result of its deliberations an 
International African Association was established, which was to have 
its seat in Brussels, and whose aim was to be the exploration and 
civilization of central Africa. Each nation wishing to cooperate 
was to collect funds for the common object. 

In 1879 Stanley was sent out to carry on the work he had already 
begun. Hitherto an explorer he now became, in addition, an 
organizer and state builder. 

During the next four or five years, 1 879-1 884, he made hundreds of 
treaties with native chiefs and foilnded many stations in the Congo 
basin. Nominally an emissary of an international association, his 
expenses were largely borne by King Leopold II. 

Portugal now put forth extensive claims to much of this Congo 
region on the ground of previous discovery. To adjust these claims 
The Berlin ^•I'ld Other matters a general conference was held in Berlin, in 
Conference 1884-1885, attended by all the states of Europe, with the ex- 
ception of Switzerland, and also by the United States. The con- 
ference recognized the existence as an independent power of the 
Congo Free State, with an extensive area, most of the Congo basin. 
It was evidently its understanding that this was to be a neutral and 
international state. Trade in it was to be open to all nations on 
equal terms, the rivers were to be free to all, and only such dues were 
to be levied as should be required to provide for the necessities of 
commerce. No trade monopolies were to be granted. The con- 
ference, however, provided no machinery for the enforcement of its 
decrees. Those decrees have remained unfulfilled. The state 
quickly ceased to be international, monopolies have been granted, 
trade in the Congo has not been free to all. 

The new state became practically Belgian because the King of Bel- 
gium was the only one to show much practical interest in the project. 
In 1885, Leopold II assumed the position of sovereign, declaring that 
the connection of the Congo Free State and Belgium should be merely 



AFRICA IN i^ 



587 



0° 10° 200 30° 40° 




AFRICA 

EUROPEAN POSSESSIONS 
IN 1884. 



60° 60° 



588 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA 

personal, he being the ruler of botli. This and later changes in the 
_^ ^ status of the Congo have either been fomiallv recognized or 

The Congo - o 

Free State L acquicsced in b}^ tlie powers. This international state finally 
Beiri^*^* in 1908 was converted outright into a Belgian colony subject, 
colony not to the personal rule of the King, but to Parliament. 



EGYPT 

Egypt, a seat of ancient civilization, was conquered by the Turks 
and became a part of the Turkish Empire in 1 5 1 7. It remained nomi- 
nally such down to 1915 when Great Britain declared it 
annexed to the British Empire as a protected state. During 
all that time its supreme ruler was the Sultan who resided in Con- 
stantinople. But a series of remarkable events in the nineteenth cen- 
tury resulted in giving it a most singular and complicated position. 
To put dov^m certain opponents of the Sultan an Albanian warrior, 
Mehemet Ali ( ma'-he-met a'-le), was sent out earlj^ in the nineteenth 
centurs*. Appointed by the Sultan Governor of Egypt in 
founds a 1806, he had, by 18 ii, made himself absolute master of the 

semi -royal countrs'. He had succeeded onlv too well. Originallv 

house - • o - 

mereh' the representative of the Sultan, he had become the 
real ruler of the land. His ambitions grew with his successes, and 
he was able to gain the important concession that the right to rule 
as -^aceroj" in Eg^-pt should be hereditan,- in his famih'. The title 
was later changed to that of Khedive. Thus was founded an 
Egyptian dynasty, subject to the d^Tiasty of Constantinople. 

The fifth ruler of this famil}^ was Ismail (is-ma-el') ( i S63-1 879) . 1 1 
was under him that the Suez Canal was completed, a great under- 
taking carried through by a French engineer, Ferdinand de 
the rapid Lesscps, the monej^ coming largely from European investors, 
^owth of the -pi^is Khedive plunged into the most reckless extravagance. 

Egyptian debt . 

As a result the Eg^-ptian debt rose with extraordinar}- rapidity 
from three million pounds in 1863 to eighty-nine million in 1876. 

The Ivhedive, needing money, sold, in 1875, his shares in the Suez 
Canal Company to Great Britain for about four million pounds, to the 
great irritation of the French. This was a mere temporaPi^ relief to 
the Khedive's finances, but was an important advantage to England, 
as the canal was destined inevitably to be the favorite route to 
India. 



ENGLISH INTERVENTION IN EGYPT 589 

This extraordinary increase of the -Egyptian debt is the key to the 
whole later history of that country. The money had been borrowed 
abroad, mainly in England and France. Fearing the bank- jntervgntion 
ruptcy of Egypt the governments of the two countries intervened of England 
in the interest of their investors, and succeeded in imposing ^° ^^'^'^^ 
their control over a large part of the financial administration. This 
was the famous Dual Control, which lasted from 1879 to 1883. 

The Khedive, Isrriail, resenting this tutelage, was consequently 
forced to abdicate, and was succeeded by his son Tewlik, who 
ruled from 1879 to 1892. The new Khedive did not struggle against 
the Dual Control, but certain elements of the population did. 
The bitter hatred inspired by this intervention of the for- ^^ ^j , 
eigners flared up in a native movement which had as its war Arabi 
cry, "Egypt for the Egyptians," and as its leader, Arabi ^^^^* 
Pasha, an officer in the army. Before this movement of his subjects 
the Khedive was powerless. It was evident that the foreign control, 
established in the interests of foreign bond-holders, could only be 
perpetuated by the suppression of Arabi and his fellow-mal- 
contents, and that the suppression could be accomplished only expedition 
by the foreigners themselves. Thus financial intervention "ushes the 

insurrection 

led directly to military intervention. England sought the 
cooperation of France, but France declined. She then proceeded 
alone, defeated Arabi in September, 1882, and crushed the rebellion. 
The English had intervened nominally in the interest of the Khe- 
dive's authority against his rebel, Arabi, though they had not been 
asked so to intervene either by the Khedive himself or by the Sultan 
of Turkey, legal sovereign of Egypt, or by the powers of Europe. 
Having suppressed the insurrection, what would they do? Would 
they withdraw their army? The question was a difficult one. To 
withdraw was to leave Egypt a prey to anarchy ; to remain was 
certainly to offend the European powers which would look upon 
this as a piece of British aggression. Particularly would such action 
be resented by France. Consequently England did not annex 
Eg3''pt. She recognized the Khedive as still the ruler, Egypt 
as still technically a part of Turkey. But she insisted on assumes the 
holding the position of "adviser" to the Khedive and also position of ^ 
insisted that her "advice" in the government of Egj^'pt be 
followed. From 1883 to 191 5 such was the situation. A British 
force remained in Egypt, the "occupation," as it was called, con- 



590 



THE PARTITION OF AFRICA 



tinued, advice was compulsory. England was ruler in fact, not in 
law. The Dual Control ended in 1883, and England began in earnest 
a work of reconstruction and reform which was carried forward 
under the guidance of Lord Cromer, who was British Consul-General 
in Egypt until 1907. 

MASSACRE OF THE ENGLISH IN THE SOUDAN 

In intervening in Egypt in 1882, England became immediately 
involved in a further enterprise which brought disaster and humilia- 
tion. Egypt possessed a de- 
pendency to the south, the 
Soudan, a vast region com- 
prising chiefly the basin of 
the Upper Nile, a poorly 
organized territory with a 
varied, semi-civilized, no- 
madic population, and a 
capital at Khartoum. This 
province, long oppressed by 
Egypt, was in full process of 
revolt. It found a chief in 
a man called the Mahdi, or 
leader, who succeeded in 
arousing the fierce religious 
fanaticism of the Soudanese 
by claiming to be a kind of 
Prophet or Messiah. Win- 
Loss of ning successes over 
the Soudan ^he Egyptian troops, 

he proclaimed a religious war, the people of the whole Soudan 
rallied about him, and the result was that the troops were driven 
into their fortresses and there besieged. Would England recognize 
any obligation to preserve the Soudan for Egypt ? Gladstone, then 
prime minister, determined to abandon the Soudan. But even this 
was a matter of difficulty. It involved at least the rescue of the 
imprisoned garrisons. The ministry was unwilling to send a military 
expedition. It finally decided to send out General Gordon, a man 
who had shown a remarkable power in influencing half-civilized races. 
It was understood that there was to be no expedition. It was 




General Gordon 



GORDON AND THE SOUDAN 



591 



apparently supposed that somehow Gordon, without miUtary aid, 
could accomplish the safe withdrawal of the garrisons. He reached 
Khartoum, but found the danger far more serious than had been sup- 
posed, the rebellion far more menacing. He found himself shortly 
shut up in Khartoum (char-tom'), surrounded by frenzied and 
confident Mahdists. At once there arose in England a cry for the 
relief of Gordon, a man whose personality, marked by heroic, ec- 
centric, magnetic qualities, 
had seized the interest, enthu- 
siasm, and imagination of the 
English people. But the Gov- 
ernment was dilatory. Weeks, 
and even months, went by. 
Finally, an expedition was 
sent out in September, 1884. 
Pushing forward rapidly, 
against great difficul- Death of 
ties, it reached Khar- Gordon 
toum January 28, 1885, only 
to find the flag of the Mahdi 
floating over it. Only two 
days before the place had 
been stormed and Gordon 
and eleven thousand of his 
men massacred. 

For a decade after this 
the Soudan was left in the 
hands of the dervishes, Recovery of 
completely abandoned. ^^^ Soudan 
But finally England resolved 
to recover this territory, which she did by the battle of Omdurman 
in which General Kitchener completely annihilated the power of the 
dervishes, September 2, 1898. 

Egypt and the Soudan were formally declared annexed to the 
British Empire in 191 5 as an incident of the European War. The 
Khedive was deposed and a new Khedive was put in his place, ^gypt and 
and Great Britain prepared to rule Egypt as she rules many the Soudan 
of the states of India, preserving the formality of a native the British 
prince as sovereign. Egypt was declared a " Protected State." Empire 




Lord Kitchexeu 



592 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA 

REFERENCES 

Explorations in Africa : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 805- 
813; Hughes, Damd Livingstone; Sta,n\ey, Autobiography, Cha.p. XN ; Harris, 
N. D., Intervention and Colonization in Africa. 

The Partition of Africa : Rose, The Development of the European Nations, 
Vol. II, pp. 228-268; Gooch, History of Our Time (Home University Library), 
pp. 178-204; Gibbons, The New Map of Africa. 

Egypt and the Soudan : Rose, Vol. n,^pp. ^143-2.27; Cambridge Modern . 
History, Vol. XII, Chap. XV, pp. 429-456; Cromer, Modern Egypt; Gibbons, 
Chaps. I, XX, XXI. 

The Congo Free State : Johnston, Colonization of Africa, Chap. XI ; Rose, 
Vol. II, pp. 269-298; Stanley, Chap. XVI; Gibbons, Chap. VIII. 



CHAPTER XXX 

THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

There were in Europe in 19 14 about twenty different states. It 
is difficult to give the precise number, since the exact status of one 
or two of them was somewhat doubtful. Some of these states were 
extremely small. There were two petty republics ; one, Andorra, 
located in the Pyrenees, which consisted chiefly of a valley Andorra and 
surrounded by high mountain peaks and which had a population San Marino 
of about five thousand. Its maximum length is seventeen miles, its 
width eighteen. Andorra is under the suzerainty of France and 
of the Spanish Bishop of Urgel, paying 960 francs a year to the 
former, 460 to the latter. The other of these republics is San 
Marino, which claims to be the oldest state in Europe, which is 
located on a spur of the Apennines, entirely surrounded by Italy, 
and which has a population of about twelve thousand. San Marino 
is the sole survivor of those numerous city-republics which abounded 
in Italy during the Middle Ages. Then there is also the little 
principality of Liechtenstein, lying between Switzerland and Liechtenstein 
Austria, and having a population of about eleven thousand. *°^ Albania 
There was also in 1914 the principality of Albania, a state which was 
created by international action inigia and 1913, and which collapsed 
in the following year at the outbreak of the war. But whatever 
the exact status of these petty states may be, they may be ignored 
in our survey as, with the exception of Albania, they have not counted 
in the general politics of Europe. 

BELGIUM AND LUXEMBURG 

There were in 19 14 three other states which occupied a peculiar 
position. They were the so-called neutralized states, Belgium, 
Luxemburg, and Switzerland. A neutralized state is one .„,. 

■ 1 1 1 • • Three 

whose mdependence and mtegrity are guaranteed forever by neutralized 
international agreement. Such states may generally main- ^*^*®^ 
tain armies, but only for defense. They may never make aggressive 

593 



594 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

war ; nor ma}' thej' make treaties or alliances with other states that 
may lead them into war. The reason wh}" a state may desire to 
become neutralized is that it is weak, that its independence is guar- 
anteed, that it has no desire or ability to participate in international 
affairs, in the usual struggles or competitions of states. The reasons 
why the great powers have consented to the neutralization of such 
states have differed in different cases. But the chief reason has been 
connected with the theory of the balance of power, the desire to keep 
them as buffers between two or more neighboring large states. 
Switzerland was neutralized in 1815 at the close of the Napoleonic 
wars, and its neutrality has never been infringed. Belgium was 
neutralized in 1831 when it separated from Holland and became an 
independent state. Luxemburg was neutralized in 1867 when it was 
freed from its previously existing connections with German}^ as an 
incident to the reorganization of Germany and the establishment of 
the North German Confederation, after the Austro-Prussian War 
of 1866 and the famous battle of Koniggratz or Sadowa. 

A neutralized state may, as has been said, have an army and a 
navy and may build fortresses, as long as this is done for purposes 
jy J of self-defense only, for a neutralized state is obliged to defend 
neutralized its neutrality', if attacked, to the full extent of its powers, 
states Thus, in 1914, Belgium and Switzerland had armies and ^ 

universal military service. Luxemburg, however, was an anomaly, 
as the treaty of 1867, neutralizing her, provided explicitly that she 
should not be allowed to keep any armed force, with the exception 
of a police for the maintenance of public security and order. L'nder 
the circumstances, Luxemburg could do nothing for the defense of 
her neutrality when invaded in August, 19 14. Belgium, however, 
could and did make a spirited, though ineffectual, resistance to the 
invader. Switzerland was not attacked, but nevertheless she mobil- 
ized her arm}' at the outbreak of the war and stood ready to defend 
herself, if necessary. Whether Belgium and Luxemburg, whose 
guaranteed rights were so poor a protection in 19 14, would be neu- 
tralized again remained, of course, to be seen. 

It cannot yet be said with confidence whether neutralization as an 
international device can stand the test of history, or not. Belgium's 
neutrality was observed by its guarantors for eighty-three years and 
then ruthlessly broken by one of them ; Luxemburg's for forty- 
seven, then broken by the same power, Germany. Switzerland, 



BELGIUM AND HOLLAND 595 

as stated, is the only one of these specially "protected" states which 
has passed unscathed by foreign war, and respected by its protectors 
for a full century and more. 

From the point of view of general European politics, the signif- 
icance of Belgium and of her northern neighbor, Holland, from whom 
she revolted in 1830, has lain in the fact that they have been Belgium and 
coveted by those Germans who have desired to increase the Holland 

coveted by 

boundaries of the German Empire, and who have, to that end, the Pan- 
advocated the absorption of certain territories lying beyond '^^'■™^°^ 
the boundaries of Germany. Belgium and Holland have been cov- 
eted by the Pan-Germans because of their riches, industrial and 
agricultural, because of their coastline, abounding in excellent 
harbors on the Atlantic, fronting England, and also because of their 
colonies, Belgium possessing a vast African domain, now called the 
Congo Colony, rich in tropical products, and Holland possessing in- 
valuable tropical islands in the East Indies, Java, Sumatra, Borneo, 
and Celebes. The Belgian colony has an area of over 900,000 square 
miles, an area about a fourth as large as that of the United States, 
including Alaska, with a population of perhaps ten million. The 
colonies of Holland or the Netherlands, as that state is officially 
called, have an area of about 800,000 square miles and a population 
of approximately thirty-eight millions. The Pan-Germans looked 
with greedy eyes upon these spacious and inviting territories, belong- 
ing to countries which, in a military sense, were conveniently weak. 



SWITZERLAND 

The chief significance of Switzerland in the general history of 
modern Europe and the world of to-day lies, not in great events, nor 
in foreign policy, for she has constantly preserved a strict ^, 
neutrality, but in the steady and thorough-going evolution of neutrality of 
certain political forms and devices which have been increas- ^'t^e^and 
ingly studied abroad and which may ultimately prove of value to all 
self-governing countries. She has been a land of interesting and 
suggestive political experimentation. 

Switzerland is a federal state. Each canton, and there are twenty- 
five of them, has its own government, with its own definite a federal 
jurisdiction and powers. But all are united for certain s*^*^ 
national purposes. The national government resembles, in some 



596 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

respects, that of the United States. There is a federal legislature, 
consisting of two houses ; the National Council, elected directly 
by the people, one member for every 20,000 inhabitants, and the 
Council of States, composed of two members for each canton. In 
the former, population counts ; in the latter, equality of the cantons 
is preserved. The two bodies sitting together choose the Federal 
Tribunal, and also a committee of seven, the Federal Council, to 
serve as the executive. From this committee of seven they elect 
each year one who acts as its chairman and whose title is " President 
of the Swiss Confederation," but whose power is no greater than that 
of any of the other members. 

But more important than the organization of the federal govern- 
ment are certain processes of law-making which have been developed 
, . in Switzerland and which are the most democratic in character 

Law-making 

by the voters known to the world. The achievement in this direction has 
themse ves ^een SO remarkable, the process so interrupted, that it merits 
description. 

In all countries calling themselves democratic, the political ma- 
chinery is representative, not direct, that is, the voters do not make 
the laws themselves, but merely at certain periods choose people, 
their representatives, who make them. These laws are not ratified 
or rejected by the voters ; they never come before the voters directly. 
But the Swiss have sought, and with great success, to render the 
voters law-makers themselves, and not the mere choosers of law- 
makers, to apply the power of the democracy to the national life 
at every point, and constantly. They have done this in various 
ways. Their methods have been first worked out in the cantons, 
and later in the Confederation. 

Some of the smaller cantons have from time immemorial been 
pure democracies. The voters have met together at stated times. 
Six purely usually in the open air, have elected their ofiicials, and by a 
democratic show of hands have voted the laws. There are six such can- 
tons to-day. Such direct government is possible, because 
these cantons are small both in area and population. They are so 
small that no voter has more than fifteen miles to go to the voting 
place, and most have a much shorter distance. 

But in the other cantons this method does not prevail. In them 
the people elect representative assemblies, as in England and the 
United States, but they exercise a control over them not exer- 



DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND 597 

cised in these countries, a control which renders self-government 
almost as complete as in the six cantons described above. 
They do this by the so-called referendum and initiative. In cantons 
the cantons where these processes are in vogue the people representa- 
do not, as in the Landesgemeinde cantons, come together 
in mass meeting and enact their own laws. They elect, as in other 
countries, their own legislature, which enacts the laws. The The 
government is representative, not democratic. But the referendum 
action of the legislature is not final,. only to be altered, if altered at 
all, by a succeeding legislature. Laws passed by the cantonal 
legislature may or must be referred to the people (referendum), who 
then have the right to reject or accept them, who, in other words, 
become the law-makers, their legislature being simply a kind of 
committee to help them by suggesting measures and by drafting 
them. 

The initiative, on the other hand, enables a certain number of 
voters to propose a law or a principle of legislation and to require 
that the legislature submit the proposal to the people, even The 
though it is itself opposed to it. If ratified, the proposal becomes initiative 
law. The initiative thus reverses the order of the process. The 
impulse to the making of a new law comes from the people, not 
from the legislature. The referendum is negative and preventive. 
It is the veto power given to the people. The initiative is positive, 
originative, constructive. By these two processes a democracy 
makes whatever laws it pleases. The one is the complement of the 
other. They do not abolish legislatures, but they give the people 
control whenever a sulhcient number wish to exercise it. The 
constitution of the canton of Zurich expresses the relation as follows : 
"The people exercise the law-making power with the assistance of the 
state legislature." The legislature is not the final law-making body. 
The voters are the supreme legislators. These two devices, the 
referendum and the initiative, are intended to establish, and do 
establish, government of the people, and by the people. They are of 
great interest to all who wish to make the practice of democracy 
correspond to the theory. By them Switzerland has more nearly 
approached democracy than has any other country. 

Switzerland has made great progress in education and in industry. 
The population has increased over a million since 1850 and now, 
numbers about three and a half millions. The population is not 



598 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

homogeneous in race or language. About 71 per cent speak Ger- 
man, 2 1 per cent French, 5 per cent Itahan, and a small fraction speak 
Population ^ peculiar Romance language called Roumansch. But lan- 
and guage has not been a divisive force, as it has been elsewhere, 

^"^^^ as, for example, in Austria and Hungary and in the Balkan 

peninsula, probably because no political advantages or disadvantages 
are connected with it. 

DENMARK 

Three other small nations of Europe are the Scandinavian states, 

Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Of these the one that has been 

most intimately and also most disastrously affected by the 

The unhappy -' . -^ -^ 

lot of general course of events in Europe is Denmark. Denmark 

Denmark ^^^ dismembered twice during the nineteenth century. Her 
importance, her resources were therefore seriously reduced. The 
first dismemberment occurred at the time of the fall of Napoleon L 
During the later wars of Napoleon Denmark had been his ally, 
remaining loyal to the end, while other allies had taken favorable 
occasion to desert him. For this conduct the conquerors of Na- 
poleon punished her severely by forcing her, by the Treaty of 
Kiel, January, 18 14, to cede Norway to Sweden, which had sided 
with the conquerors. The condition of the Danish kingdom was, 
therefore, deplorable indeed. By the loss of Norway her population 
was reduced one-third. Her trade was ruined, and her finances 
were in the greatest disorder. 

The second dismemberment occurred fifty years later when 

Prussia and Austria declared war upon her in 1864, defeated her and 

Schieswig Seized the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. Again she 

and Holstein suffered grievously at the hands of the great military powers. 

Her territory was reduced by a third, her population by a million. 

For a year Prussia and Austria governed the two provinces in 

common ; for another year Prussia governed one, and Austria 

governed the other. Then Prussia and Austria went to war 

Annexed by ° 

Prussia, with each Other in 1866. The former conquered the latter, 

*^^^ expelled her from Germany, and incorporated both duchies 

outright in the Kingdom of Prussia. 

Out of this annexation of half a century ago arose a question des- 
tined more than fifty years later to receive the attention of the 
world at a time of general reorganization. Holstein was inhabited 



PRUSSIAN OPPRESSION OF SCHLESVVIG 599 

by a population of about 600,000, who were Germans in race and 
language and sympathies. These people were glad to be united 
with Germany, though they would have preferred to enter 
the North German Confederation as a separate state, rather '^^^ 

^ problein of 

than be incorporated in the Kingdom of Prussia. The other Schieswig 
province, Schieswig, had a mixed population. About 250,000 
were Germans, about 150,000 were Danes. The latter desired to 
remain with Denmark and, had the principle of nationality been 
observed, they would have been permitted to. They spoke the 
Danish language, were Danish in blood, and were located in the 
northern part of Schieswig, contiguous to Denmark. 

It seemed at one moment as if their wishes would be satisfied, 
the justice of their claims being so obvious and unimpeachable. 
A provision was inserted in the Treaty of Prague which ter- 

SchlcswicT 

minated the Austro- Prussian War of 1866 to the effect " that the and the 
people of the northern district of Schieswig shall be again Treaty of 
reunited with Denmark if they shall, by a popular vote, 
express the desire to be." This provision was inserted on the 
insistence of Austria, at the moment that she was, under compulsion, 
leaving Germany. Had it been observed, there would have been no 
Schieswig question demanding solution in our day. 

But the promise that the people concerned might decide their 
future allegiance was never kept. This provision was a dead letter 
for twelve j^ears, from 1866 to 1878. Then in 1878 it was abrogated 
by the two powers, Germany and Austria, neither of which consulted 
the wishes of the Schleswigers. In that year Bismarck was able 
to render certain services to Austria in the Balkans, and in return 
he asked that Austria consent to "revise" this clause by formally 
declaring it "null and void." Austria agreed, and thus the Schles- 
wigers were left to the mercy of Prussia. 

Since that day the Prussian Government has oppressed the Danes 
of Schieswig as it has oppressed the people^ of Alsace-Lorraine, as 
it has long oppressed the Poles, acquired in the three infamous 
partitions of the eighteenth century. Prussia has ruled oppression of 
despotically. She has made every effort to stamp out the *^^^^^^°^^. 

1 , • 1 • 1111 of Schieswig 

Danish language, to prevent its being taught m the schools, 
although it was the mother tongue of those attending them. In 1889 
it was forbidden to teach Danish under any circumstances whatever. 
Nor might any Schieswig family engage a Danish tutor for purposes 



6oo THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

of private instruction. Even parents were liable to prosecution if 
they gave systematic instruction in Danish to their children. Nor 
were they permitted to send their children to Denmark to be edu- 
cated. For fifty years the people of North Schleswig have been 
subjected to this ignoble and pitiless persecution, but they have not 
been Germanized or Prussianized. However, being few in numbers, 
less than 200,000, their grievances could gain no hearing, no redress. 
In the fall of 191 8, when Germany collapsed, these long maltreated 
people demanded that Prussia renounce all claims to them, and that 
they should be allowed to be united with their kin in the kingdom of 
Denmark. Whether their demand would be granted by the world 
in diplomatic congress assembled remained to be seen. 

SWEDEN AND NORWAY 

Another outstanding feature of recent Scandinavian history has 

been the relation of Sweden and Norway toward each other. We 

have seen that in 18 14 Norway was torn from Denmark by the 

Norway -^ . -^ 

declares her conquerors of Napoleon and given to Sweden. The Nor- 
independence ^ggjg^^s were not consultcd in this transaction. They were 
regarded as a negligible quantity, a passive pawn in the international 
game, a conception that proved erroneous, for no sooner did they 
hear that they were being handed by outsiders from Denmark to 
Sweden than they protested, and proceeded to organize resistance. 
Claiming that the Danish King's renunciation of the crown of 
Norway restored that crown to themselves, they proceeded to elect 
a king of their own. May 17, 18 14, and they adopted a liberal consti- 
tution, the Constitution of Eidsvold, establishing a Parliament, or 
Storthing. 

But the King of Sweden, to whom this country had been assigned 

by the consent of the powers, did not propose to be deprived of it 

^ , . , by act of the Norwegians themselves. He sent the Crown 

Relations of -^ . » 

Norway Prmce, Bemadotte, mto Norway to take possession. A war 

and Sweden j-gg^i^-g^j between the Swedes and the Norwegians, the latter 
being victorious. Thereupon the great powers intervened so per- 
emptorily that the newly elected Norwegian king. Christian, resigned 
his crown into the hands of the Storthing. The Storthing (stor'-ting) 
then acquiesced in the union with Sweden, but only after having 
formally elected the King of Sweden as the King of Norway, thus 



RELATIONS OF SWEDEN AND NORWAY 



60 1 



asserting its sovereignty, and also after the King had promised to 
recognize the Constitution of 18 14, which the Norwegians had given 
themselves. 

Thus there was no fusion of Norway and Sweden. There were 
two kingdoms and one king. The same person was King of 
Sweden and King of Norway, but he governed each according 
to its own laws, and by means of separate ministries. No kingdoms 
Swede could hold oflfice in Norwav, no Norwegian in Sweden. ^^^^'^ *!»« 

... "... ,. same king 

Each country had its separate constitution, its separate parlia- 
ment. In Sweden the Parlia- 
ment, or Diet, consisted of 
four houses, representing re- 
spectively the nobility, the 
clergy, the cities, and the 
peasantry. In Norway the 
Parliament, or Storthing, con- 
sisted of two chambers. 
Sweden had a strong aris- 
tocracy, Norway only a small 
and feeble one. Swedish gov- 
ernment and society were aris- 
tocratic and feudal, Norwegian 
very democratic. Norway, in- 
deed, was a land of peasants, 
who owned their farms, and 
fisherfolk, sturdy, simple, in- 
dependent. Each country had 
its own language, each its own 
capital, that of Sweden at 
Stockholm, that of Norway , 
at Christiania. 
The two kingdoms, therefore, were very dissimilar, with their 

different languages, different institutions, and different conditions. 

They had in common a king, and ministers of war and foreign affairs. 

The connection between the two countries, limited as it was, led 

during the century to frequent and bitter disagreements, ending a 

few years ago in their final separation. 

Under Oscar II, who ruled from 1872 to 1907, the relations between 

Sweden and Norway became acute, leading finally to complete 




Oscar II 



6o2 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

rupture. Friction between theln had existed ever since 1814, and 

• had provoked frequent crises. The fundamental cause had lain in 

Increasing the different conceptions prevalent among the two peoples as to 

friction ^j^g i-ga,l nature of the union effected in that year. The Swedes 

between 

Norway and maintained that Norway was unqualifiedly ceded to them by 
Sweden ^^iq Treaty of Kiel in 18 14; that they later were willing to 

recognize that the Norwegians should have a certain amount of inde- 
pendence ; that they, nevertheless, possessed certain rights in 
Norway and preponderance in the Union. The Norwegians, on 
the other hand, maintained that the Union rested, not upon the 
Treaty of Kiel, a treaty between Denmark and Sweden, but upon 
their own act ; that they had been independent, and had drawn up a 
constitution for themselves, the Constitution of Eidsvold ; that they 
had voluntarily united themselves with Sweden by freely electing the 
King of Sweden as King of Norway ; that there was no fusion of the 
two states ; that Sweden had no power in Norway ; that Sweden 
had no preponderance in the Union, but that the two states were on a 
plane of entire equality. With two such dissimilar views friction 
could not fail to develop, and it began immediately after 18 14 
on a question of trivial importance. The Norwegians were re- 
solved to manage their own internal affairs as they saw fit, with- 
out any intermixture of Swedish influence. But their King was 
also King of Sweden, and, as a matter of fact, lived in Sweden 
most of the time, and was rarely seen in Norway. Moreover, 
Sweden was in population much the larger partner in this uncom- 
fortable union. 

By the Constitution of Eidsvold the King had only a suspensive 
veto over the laws of the Storthing, the Norwegian Parliament. 
Abolition of ^^^ ^^^ could be enacted over that veto if passed by three 
Norwegian succcssive Storthings, with intervals of three years between 
no 1 1 y ^j^g votes. The process was slow, but sufficient to insure 

victory in any cause in which the Norwegians were in earnest. 
It was thus that, despite the King's veto, they carried through the 
abolition of the Norwegian nobility. Contests between the Storthing 
and the King of Norway, occurring from time to time, over the 
question of the national flag, of annual sessions, and other matters, 
kept alive the antipathy of the Norwegians to the Union. Mean- 
while, their prosperity increased. Particularly did they develop an 
important commerce. One-fourth of the merchant marine of the 



SEPARATION OF SWEDEN AND NORWAY 603 

continent of Europe passed gradually into their hands. This gave 
rise to a question more serious than any that had hitherto arisen 
-■ — that of the consular service. 

About 1892 began a fateful discussion over the question of the 
consular service. The Norwegian Parliament demanded a separate 
consular service for Norwav, to be conducted by itself, to care „ 

-^ ' Norway and 

for Norway's commercial interests, so much more important Sweden 
than those of Sweden. This the King would not grant, on ^^p^''^*^ 
the ground that it would break up the Union, that Sweden and 
Norway could not have two foreign policies. The coniiict thus 
begun dragged on for years, embittering the relations of the Nor- 
wegians and the Swedes and inflaming passions until in 1905 (June 7) 
the Noru^egian Parliament declared unanimously "that the Union 
with Sweden under one king has ceased." The war feeling in Sweden 
was strong, but the Government finally decided, in order to avoid 
the evils of a conflict, to recognize the dissolution of the Union, on 
condition that the question of separation should be submitted to the 
people of Norway. Sweden held that there was no proof that the 
Norwegian people desired this, but was evidently of the opinion that 
the whole crisis was simply the work of the Storthing. That such 
an opinion was erroneous was established by the vote on August 13, 
1905, which showed over 368,000 in favor of separation and only 184 
votes in opposition. A conference was then held at Carlstad to draw 
up a treaty or agreement of dissolution. This agreement provided 
that any disputes arising in the future between the two countries, 
which could not be settled by direct diplomatic negotiations, should 
be referred to the Hague International Arbitration Tribunal. It 
further provided for the establishment of a neutral zone along the 
frontiers of the two countries, on which no military fortification 
should ever be erected. 

Later in the year the Norwegians chose Prince Charles of Denmark, 
grandson of the then King of Denmark, as King of Norway. There 
was a strong feeling in favor of a republic, but it seemed clear jja^jj^n yii 
that the election of a king would be more acceptable to the King of 
monarchies of Europe, and would avoid all possibilities of for- °''way 
eign intervention. The new king assumed the name of Haakon VII, 
thus indicating the historical continuity of the independent kingdom 
of Norway, which had existed in the Middle Ages. He took up his 
residence in Christiania. 



6o4 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

On December 8, 1907, Oscar II, since 1905 King of Sweden only, 
. died, and was succeeded by his son as Gustavus V. 

In 1909 Sweden took a long step toward democracy. A franchise 
reform bill, which had long been before Parliament, was finally passed. 
Manhood suffrage was established for the Lower House, and the 
qualifications for election to the Upper House were greatly reduced. 

In Norway, men who have reached the age of twenty-five, and 
Suffrage in who have been residents of the country for five years, have the 
Norway right to vote. By a constitutional amendment adopted in 1907 

the right to vote for members of the Storthing was granted to women 
who meet the same qualifications, and who, in addition, pay, or whose 
husbands pay, a tax upon an income ranging from about seventy-five 
dollars in the country to about one hundred dollars in cities. About 
300,000 of the 550,000 Norwegian women of the age of twenty-five 
or older, thus secured the suffrage. They had previously, enjoyed 
the suffrage in local elections. Women are, since 191 3, entitled to 
vote under the same conditions as men. 

Sweden has a population of about five and a half millions ; Norway 
of less than two and a half millions. 



SPAIN 

In the Iberian peninsula are two of the lesser states of Europe, 
Spain and Portugal. Spain possesses a large territory and a popu- 
lation of twenty million, yet not since the sixteenth century has she 
played an important role in history. Between the Napoleonic 
period and the Franco- Prussian War her life flowed on heavily in 
the traditional channels of the old regime, of monarchical arbitrari- 
ness and pettiness, of intellectual and religious intolerance, of gov- 
ernmental incompetence, of economic lethargy. Against the 
stupidity and essential meaninglessness of such a system and against 
the monarch who personified it, Isabella II, a revolt finally broke 
out in 1868 which speedily drove the Queen into exile in France, 
whence she was not destined to return. The reign of the Spanish 
Bourbons was declared at an end, and universal suffrage, religious 
liberty, and freedom of the press were proclaimed. 

Then began a troubled and changeful period which lasted several 
years. A national assembly was elected by universal suffrage and 
the future government of Spain was left to its determination. It 



SPAIN DECLARED A REPUBLIC 605 

pronounced in favor of a monarchy and against a republic. It then 
ransacked Europe for a king and finally chose Prince Leopold of 
Hohenzollern. His candidacy is important in history as having -ph h h 
been the immediate occasion of the Franco- Prussian War. zoUern 
In the end Leopold declined the invitation. candidacy 

In November, 1870, the crown was offered by a vote of 191 out 
of 311 to Amadeo, second son of Victor Emmanuel II, King of Italy .^ 
The smallness of the majorit}^ was ominous. The new king's Amadeo 
reign was destined to be short and troubled. Landing in Spain chosen king 
at the close of 1870, he was coldly received. Opposition to him came 
from several sources — from the Republicans, who were opposed to 
any monarch ; from the Carlists, who supported a pretender to the 
throne ; from the supporters of Alfonso, son of Isabella, who held 
that he was the legitimate ruler. Amadeo was disliked also for the 
simple reason that he was a foreigner. The clergy attacked him for 
his adherence to constitutional principles of government. No strong 
body of politicians supported him. Ministries rose and fell with great 
rapidity, eight in two years, one of them lasting only seventeen days. 
Each change left the government more disorganized and more 
unpopular. Believing that the problem of giving peace to Spain was 
insoluble, and wearying of an uneasy crown, Amadeo, in February, 
1873, abdicated. 

Immediately the Cortes or Parliament declared Spain a Republic 
by a vote of 258 to 32. But the advent of the RepubHc did not 
bring peace. Indeed, its history was brief and agitated. 
European powers, with the exception of Switzerland, withdrew dedares*^^ 
their diplomatic representatives. The United States alone ^p^"* ? 
recognized the new government. The Republic lasted from 
February, 1873, to the end of December, 1874. It established a wide 
suffrage, proclaimed religious liberty, proposed the complete separa- 
tion of the church and state, and voted unanimously for the imme- 
diate emancipation of slaves in Porto Rico. Then it fell. 

The causes of its fall were numerous. The fundamental one was 
that the Spaniards had had no long political training, essential for 
efficient self-government, no true experience in party man- 
agement. The leaders did not work together harmoniously, republic 
Moreover, the Republicans, once in power, immediately ^^^^'^ 
broke up into various groups, which fell to wrangling with each other. 
1 Sixty-three voted for a republic ; the other votes were scattering or blank. 



6o6 THE SiMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

The enemies of the Republic were numerous ; the Monarchists, the 
clergy, offended by the proclamation of religious liberty, and all 
those who profited by the old regime and who resented the reforms 
which were threatened. Also, the problems that faced the new gov- 
ernment increased the confusion. Three wars were in progress during 
the brief life of the Republic — a war in Cuba, a Carlist war, and a 
war with the Federalists in southern Spain. 

Presidents succeeded each other rapidly. Figueras was in office 
four months, Pi y Margall six weeks, Salmeron and Castelar for 
short periods. Finally, Serrano became practically dictator. The 
fate of the Republic was determined by the generals of the army, 
the most powerful body in the country, who declared, in December, 
1874, in favor of Alfonso, son of Isabella II. The Republic fell 
Alfonso XII without a struggle. Alfonso, landing in Spain early in 1875, 
promises a ^nd being received in Madrid with great enthusiasm, as- 

constitu- . . ° . 

tionai sumed the government, promismg a constitutional mon- 

monarchy archy. Thus, six years after the dethronement of Isabella, 
her son was welcomed back as King. The new King was now seven- 
teen years of age. His reign lasted ten years, until his death in 
November, 1885. In 1876 a new Constitution was voted, the last 
in the long line of ephemeral documents issuing during the century 
from either monarch or Cortes or revolutionary Junta. Still in 
force, the Constitution of 1876 creates a responsible ministry, and a 
Parliament of two chambers. Spain possesses the machinery of 
parliamentary government, ministries rising and falling according 
to the votes of Parliament. Practically, however, the political wel- 
fare is largely mimic, determined by the desire for ofhce, not by 
devotion to principles or policies. 

Alfonso XII died in 1885. His wife, an Austrian princess, Maria 

Christina, was proclaimed regent for a child born a few months later, 

the present King, Alfonso XIII. Maria Christina, during the sixteen 

years of her regency, confronted many difficulties. Of these 

Christina the most serious was the condition of Cuba, Spain's chief 

proclaimed colony. An insurrection had broken out in that island in 

regent 

1868, occasioned by gross misgovernment by the mother 

country. This Cuban war dragged on for ten years, cost Spain 

The Cuban nearly 100,000 men and $200,000,000, and was only ended 

insurrection [^ j^g by means of lavish bribes and liberal promises of 

reform in the direction of self-government. As these promises were 



THE SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR 607 

not fulfilled, and as the condition of the Cubans became more unen- 
durable, another rebellion broke out in 1895. This new war, pros- 
ecuted with great and savage severity by Weyler, ultimately aroused 
the United States to intervene in the interests of humanity and 
civilization. A war resulted between the United States and Spain 
in 1898, which proved most disastrous to the latter. Her 
naval power was annihilated in the battles of Santiago and toe^Spai^sh- 
Cavite ; her army in Santiago was forced to surrender, and American 
she was compelled to sign the Treaty of Paris of 1898, by 
which she renounced Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippine Islands. 
The Spanish Empire, which at the opening of the nineteenth century 
bulked large on the map of the world, comprising immense possessions 
in America and the islands of both hemispheres, has disappeared. 
Revolts in Central and South America, beginning when Joseph 
Napoleon becam^e King in 1808, and ending with Cuban independence 
ninety years later, have left Spain with the mere shreds of her former 
possessions, Rio de Oro, Rio Muni in western Africa, some land about 
her ancient presidios in Morocco, and a few small islands off the 
African coast. The disappearance of the Spanish colonial empire is 
one of the most significant features of the nineteenth century. Once 
one of the great world powers, Spain is to-day a state of inferior rank. 
In 1902 the present King, Alfonso XIII, formally assumed the 
reins of government. He married in May, 1906, a member of the 
royal family of England, Princess Ena of Battenberg. Pro- Needed 
found and numerous reforms are necessary to range the country feforms 
in the line of progress. Though universal suffrage was es- education] 
tablished in 1890, political conditions and methods have not ^n^ religion 
changed. Illiteracy is widespread. Out of a population of 20,000,000 
'^perhaps 12,000,000 are iUiterate. In recent years attempts have 
been made to improve this situation ; also to reduce the influence 
of the Roman Catholic Church in the state. Nothing important 
has yet been accomplished in this direction. Liberty of public 
worship has only recently been secured for the members of other 
churches. 



PORTUGAL 

Portugal, too, the other Iberian state, droned along during most 
of the nineteenth century, under incompetent rulers and selfish and 



6o8 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE 

enlightened privileged classes, the dreary monotony of her life only 
relieved by an occasional national calamity, as when, in 1822, her 
Portugal leading colony, Brazil, revolted and launched out upon an in- 

loses Brazil dependent career as an empire. Several reigns followed, tur- 
bulent in a petty way, or mild and uneventful, as the case might be. 
But, as the century wore on, and particularly under the reign of 
Carlos I, from 1899 to 1908, there was a ruffling of the waters and 
G owth f certain radical parties. Republican, Socialist, grew up. Dis- 
radicai content with so stagnant a regime expressed itself increasingly 

par les ^^ deeds of violence. The Government replied by becoming 

more and more arbitrary. The King, Carlos I, even assumed to 
alter the Charter of 1826, still the basis of Portuguese political life, 
by mere decree. The controversy between Liberals, Radicals, and 
Conservatives developed astounding bitterness. Parliamentary 
institutions ceased to work normally ; necessary legislation could 
not be secured. On February i, 1908, the King and the Crown 
Prince were assassinated in the streets of Lisbon. The King's 
second son, Manuel, succeeded him. Manuel's reign was brief, for, 
in October, 19 10, a revolution broke out in Lisbon. After several 
Portu ai days of severe street fighting the monarchy was overthrown 

proclaimed and a Republic was proclaimed. The King escaped to Eng- 
epu ic 2^j^^^ j-jj. jhgQpi^Qg Braga, a native of the Azores, and for 
over forty years a distinguished man of letters, was chosen President. 
The constitution was remodeled and liberalized. The Church was 
separated from the State in 191 1, and State payments for the main- 
tenance and expenses of worship ceased. 

Since 19 10 Portugal, therefore, has been a Republic. The prob- 
lems confronting her are numerous and serious. She is burdened 
jjgj. with an immense debt, disproportionate to her resources, and 

problems entailing oppressive taxation. Although primary education 
^^ has been compulsory since 191 1, over seventy per cent of the 

population over six years of age still remain illiterate. Portugal's 
population is about six millions. She has small colonial possessions 
in Asia and extensive ones in Africa, which have thus far proved of 
little value. The Azores and Madeira are not colonies, but are 
integral parts of the republic. 

Portugal was destined to play a minor but honorable role in the 
European War, side by side with the Entente Allies. 



PORTUGAL AND THE GREAT WAR 609 

The only other small states in Europe, besides those mentioned 
in this chapter, are the ones which have arisen during the nineteenth 
century in the Balkan peninsula, and whose history we will now 
examine. 

REFERENCES 

Holland : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 661-668 ; Vol. XII, pp. 
243-250; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 238-244. 

Belgium: Cambridge Modern History, Vol. 'XI, pp. 669-674; Vol. XII, pp. 
250-256; Seignobos, pp. 244-255 ; Ensor, Belgium (Home University Library), 
pp. 142-250; Ogg, The Governments of Europe, Chap. XXIX. 

History of Switzerland : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. VIII, 
pp. 234-261 ; Hug and Stead, Switzerland, pp. 382-421 ; Baker, A History of the 
Rise and Progress of the Swiss People, pp. 462-538; Lowell, Governments and 
Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. II, pp. 301-336; Seignobos, Political 
History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 257-284. 

Political Institutions : Lowell, Vol. II, Chaps. XI and XII ; Ogg, 
Governments of Europe, pp. 405-439 ; Vincent, Government in Switzerland, pp. 
180-300; Hobson, A Sovereign People: A Study of Siviss Democracy; Ogg; 
Social Progress in Contemporary Europe, Chap. XIV, pp. 200-212. 

Denm.\rk : Bain, A Political History of Denmark, Norway and Sweden, from 
ijij to igoo, Chap. XVI; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. XXIV, 
• pp. 691-697; Vol. XII, Chap. XI, pp. 290-293; Seignobos, Political History of 
Europe Since 1814, pp. 566-577. 

Sweden: Bain, Chap. XVII; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 
677-690; Vol. XII, pp. 273-280; Seignobos, pp. 554-SS9- 

Norway: Bain, Chap. XVII; Cambridge Modern Ifistory,\o\. XI, pp. 677- 
690; Vol. XII, pp. 280-290; Boyesen, History of Norway, pp. 516-538; Seigno- 
bos, pp. 559-566. 

Spain : Hume, Modern Spain, pp. 248-263 ; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. XI, pp. 550-572; Vol. XII, pp. 257-269; Encyclopccdia Britannica, Yo\. 
XXV, pp. 556-569; Strobel, The Spanish Revolution, 1S68-1875; H. R. White- 
house, The Sacrifice of a Throne; J. L. M. Curry, Constitutional Government in 
Spain. 

Portugal: Stephens, Portugal, pp. 409-432; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. XI, pp. 572-575; Vol. XII, pp. 269-272. 

The Republic of Portugal: International Year Book, 1910, pp. 599-600; 
1911, pp. 582-584. 



CHAPTER XXXI 

THE DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND 
THE RISE OF THE B.\LKAX STATES 

All through the period covered by this book there went on the 

process of the dismemberment of an empire which had once terrified 

Tx * .V the western world, threatening all Europe with subjection 

DecAv of the ^ r- -• 

Ottoman beneath her peculiarly galling and debasing yoke. During 
Empire ^|^^ ^^^ ^^,^ ccnturies that empire has been on the defensive 

and has steadily lost ground. In the eighteenth century Russia and 
Austria^ her neighbors, desvx>iled her of some of her valuable lands. 
In the nineteenth it was, in the main, her own subjects who rose 
against her, who tore the empire apart, and founded a number of 
independent states on soil that was formerly Turkish. The map of 
modem Europe shows no greater change as compared with the map 
a hundred years ago than in the Balkan peninsula. That change 
is the prcxiuct of a most eventful histor\-, the solution thus far given 
to one of the most intricate and contentious problems European 
<^es^on*™ statesmen have ever had to consider, the Eastern Question, 
the question, that is, of what should be done with Turkey. 
The Turks, an Asiatic, Mohammedan people, had conquered south- 
eastern Europe in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and had 
subdued many different races; the Greeks, claiming descent from 
the Greeks of antiquity ; the Roumanians, claiming descent from 
Roman colonists of the Empire ; the Albanians, and various branches 
Treatment *^^ ^^^^ great Slavic race, the Serbiai\s, Bulgarians, Bosnians, 
of subject and Montenegrins. Full of contempt for those whom they 
^^^^^ had conquered, the Turks made no attempt to assimilate 

them or to fuse them into one body politic. They were satisfied 
with reducing them to subjection, and with exploiting them. These 
Christian peoples were eftaced for several centuries beneath Moham- 
medan oppression, their property likely to be confiscated, their 



tap. ui<¥t rxr ^k»ia 6>ii 

ft 



y - S^rlM^M 

ivy. -^d fyy iSos^a* h-- 

at -•• a 

^ - 

'f' • • •. -e 

diMii«mb«rm«nt of Ewftj>eai> Ttnrfo^jr-, Jl^ av(M^ vats Befafras^Je. 

tHf. OkEfcK WAR Of f?nr>fcirp.^i>y.^CT. 

wjtsy th«; GfftcfcA. The Oreefe* I*ad be^^- ht 

flryy) bat - ' ' • ' ' . 

ar ■ - >r> 



6i2 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 

to bend before Turkish arrogance, their prosperity was greater. 
Th condi There had occurred in the eighteenth century a remarkable 
tion of the intellectual revival, connected with the restoration and puri- 
Greeks fication of the Greek language. 

In 1 82 1 the Greeks rose in revolt and began a war which did not 
end until they had achieved their independence in 1 829. During the 
The Greek ^^^^ ^^'^ years they fought alone against the Turks. This 
war of inde- period was followed by a period of foreign intervention. The 
pen ence ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ Utter atrocity on both sides, a war of extermina- 
tion, a war not limited to the armies. Each side, when victorious, 
murdered large numbers of non-combatants, men, women, and 
children. 

The war was ineffectually prosecuted by Turkey. The period was 

made still more wretched by the inability of the Greeks to work 

together harmoniously. Torn by violent factional quarrels, 

quarrels they Were unable to gain any pronounced advantage. On the 

among the other hand, Turkey, unable to conquer bv her own force, 

Greeks 

called upon the Pasha of Egypt, Mehemet Ali, for aid. 
This ruler had built up a strong, disciplined army, well-equipped and 
trained in European methods, a force far superior to any which the 
Sultan or the Greeks possessed. Under Ibrahim, the Pasha's son, 
an Egyptian army of 11,000 landed in the Morea early in 1825, and 
began a war of extermination. The Morea was rapidly conquered. 
The fall of Missolonghi after a remarkable siege lasting about a year 
(April, 1825-April, 1826), with the loss of almost all the inhabitants, 
and the capture the following year of Athens and the Acropolis, 
seemed to have completed the subjugation of Greece. Few places 
remained to be seized. 

From the extremity of their misfortune the Greeks were rescued by 
the decision of foreign powers finally to intervene. The sympathy of 
cultivated people had, from the first, been aroused for the country 
Foreign which had given intellectual freedom and distinction to the 

intervention world, this Mother of the Arts, which was now making an 
heroic and romantic struggle for an independent and worthy life of 
her own. Everywhere Philhellenic societies were formed under 
this inspiration of the memories of Ancient Greece. These societies, 
founded in France, Germany, Switzerland, England, and the United 
States, sought to aid the insurgents by sending money, arms, and 
volunteers, and by bringing pressure to bear upon the governments 



THE KINGDOM OF GREECE 613 

to intervene. Many men from western Europe joined the Greek 
armies. The most illustrious of these was Lord Byron, who gave 
his life for the idea of a free Greece, dying of fever at Missolonghi 
in 1824. Finally the governments resolved to intervene. England, 
Russia, and France, by the Treaty of London of 1827, agreed to de- 
mand that Greece be made a self-governing state under Turkish 
sovereignty, be therefore placed in practically the same The battle 
situation as Serbia. The demand was refused b}^ the Turk- °* Navarino 
ish government. A naval battle at Navarino (na-va-re'-no)» 
October 20, 1827, resulted in the destruction of the Turkish fleet. 
The following year Russia declared war upon Turkey. This ^^^ between. 
Russo-Turkish war lasted over a year. In the first campaign Russia and 
the Russians were unsuccessful, but, redoubling their efforts, "^ ^^ 
and under better leadership, they crossed the Balkans, and marched 
rapidly toward Constantinople. The French meanwhile had sent 
an army into the Morea, and had forced the Egyptian troops to leave 
the country and sail for Egypt. The Sultan was obliged to yield 
and the Treaty of Adrianople was signed with Russia September 14, 
1829. 

As the outcome of this series of events Greece became a kingdom, 
entirely independent of Turkey, its independence guaranteed by the 
three powers, Russia, England, and France. The Danubian 
principalities, Moldavia and Wallachia, were made prac- of the 
tically, though not nominally, independent. The Sultan's Kingdom of 
power in Europe was therefore considerably reduced. In 
1833 Otto, a lad of seventeen, second son of King Louis I of Bavaria, 
became the first King of Greece. A new .Christian state had been 
created in southeastern Europe. 

THE CRIMEAN WAR 

Russia emerged from the Turkish War with increased prestige and 
power. It had been her campaign of 1829 that had brought the 
Sultan to terms. Greece had become independent, and was more 
grateful to her than to the other powers. Moldavia and Wallachia, 
still nominally a part of Turkey, were practically free of Turkish jhe prin- ; 
control, and Russian influence in them was henceforth para- "paiities 
mount. Several years later Russia was emboldened to attempt to 
extend her influence still farther, and this attempt precipitated a 



6i4 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 

reopening of the Eastern Question, and the first great European war 
since the fall of Napoleon I. 

Russia demanded the right of protection over all Greek Christians 
living in the Turkish Empire, of whom there were several millions. 
Russian The demand was loosely expressed and might possibly, if 

demands granted, grow into a constant right of intervention by Russia 

in the internal affairs of Turkey, ultimately making that country a 
War between ^^^^ ^^ vassal of the former. This, at any rate, was the 
Russia and assertion of Turkey. War therefore broke out between the 
^^ ^^ two powers, Russia and Turkey, in 1853. Russia expected 

that the war would be limited to these two. In this she was shortly 
undeceived, for England and France and later Piedmont, came to the 
lition support of the Turks. Russia found herself opposed by four 
against powers instead of by one. England went to war because she 

Russia feared an aggressive and expanding Russia, feared for the route 

to India ; France because Napoleon III wished to pay back old grudges 
against Russia, wished revenge for the Moscow campaign of Napoleon 
I, wished also to tear up the treaties of 181 5, which sealed the humili- 
ation of France. Piedmont went to war merely to win the interest of 
England and France for Cavour's plans for the making of Italy. 

The war was chiefly fought in the Crimea, a peninsula in southern 

Russia, jutting out into the Black Sea and important because there 

The aUies Russia had Constructed, at Sebastopol, a great naval arsenal, 

invade the and bccausc the Russian navy was there. To seize Sebastopol, 

nmea ^^ ^-^j^ ^-^^ fleet, would destroy Russia's naval power for many 

years, and thus remove the weapon with which she could seriousl)^ 

menace Turkey. 

The siege of Sebastopol was the chief feature of the Crimean War. 
That siege lasted eleven months. Sebastopol was defended in a 
The siege of masterly fashion by Todleben (tot'-la-ben), the Russian 
Sebastopol engineer, and the only military hero of the first order that the 
war developed. Parts of this campaign, subsidiary to the siege, 
were the battles of the Alma, of Balaklava, rendered forever memor- 
able by the splendid charges of the heavy and light brigades, and of 
Inkermann, full of stirring and heroic incident. The Allies suffered 
fearfully from the weather, the bitter cold, the breakdown of the 
commissary department, and the shocking inefficiency of the medical 
and hospital service. These deficiencies were remedied in time, 
but only after a terrible loss of life. 



RESULTS OF THE CRIMEAN WAR 615 

Early in 1855 (March 2), Nicholas I died, bitterly disappointed at 
the failure of his plans. Throughout the summer of 1855 the state of 
Sebastopol grew steadily worse and it finally fell, on September 8, 
1855, after a siege of 336 days, and an enormous expenditure in 
human lives. 

The war dragged on for some weeks longer, but as most of the 
powers were anxious for peace, they agreed to enter the Congress of 
Paris, which met February 25, 1856, and which, after a month's Treaty of 
deliberation, signed the Treaty of Paris, March 30, 1856. p^"^ 
The treaty provided that the Black Sea should henceforth be neutral- 
ized, that it should not be open to vessels of war, even of those coun- 
tries bordering on it, Russia and Turkey, and that no arsenals should 
be established or maintained on its shores. I ts waters were to be open 
to the merchant ships of every nation. The navigation of the Danube 
was declared free. The Russian protectorate over Moldavia and 
W'allachia was abolished and they were declared independent under 
the suzerainty of the Porte. The most important clause was that 
by which the powers admitted Turkey to the European family of 
states, from which she had been previously excluded as a barbarous 
nation, and by which they also agreed no more to interfere with her 
internal affairs. This action was taken, it was said, because the 
Sultan had, "in his constant solicitude for the welfare of his subjects, 
issued a firman recording his generous intentions towards the Chris- 
tian population of his Empire." 

Thus Turkey was bolstered up- by the Christian powers of western 
Europe because they did not wish to see Russia installed in Constanti- 
nople. As a solution of the Eastern Question the war was a flat 
failure. The promise of the Sultan that the lot of his Christian sub- 
jects should be improved was never kept. Their condition became 
worse. 

REVOLTS IN THE BALKANS 

By the middle of the nineteenth century the only part of the 
Turkish Empire that had become independent was Greece ; Serbia 
and Moldavia-Wallachia were semi-independent and aspired to 
become completely so. The two latter provinces shortly declared 
themselves united under the single name of Roumania and, Rise of 
in 1866, they chose as their prince, a member of the Roman Roumania 
Catholic branch of the HohenzoUern family, Charles I. This 



6i6 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 

German prince, who was the ruler of Roumania until his death in 

1914, was at that time twenty-seven years of age. He at 

Roumania"^ once set to work to study the conditions of his newly adopted 

country, ably seconded in this by his wife, a German princess, 

whose literary gift was to win her a great reputation, and was to be 

used in the interest of Roumania. As "Carmen Sylva" she wrote 

poems and stories, published a collection of Roumanian folklore, 

and encouraged the national idea by showing her preference for the 

native Roumanian dress and for old Roumanian customs. 

Charles I was primarily a soldier, and the great work of the early 
years of his reign was to build up the army, as he believed it essential 
if Roumania was to be really independent in her attitude toward 
Russia and Turkey. He increased the size of the army, equipped 
it with Prussian guns, and had it drilled by Prussian officers. The 
wisdom of this was apparent when the Eastern Question was again 
reopened. 

In 1875 the Eastern Question entered once more upon an acute 

phase. Movements began which were to have a profound effect 

upon the various sections of the peninsula. An insurrection 

Reopening , , . , ,1 • t t 

of the broke out m the summer of that year m Herzegovma, a prov- 

Eastern j^^^-g ^Qst of Serbia. For years the peasantry had suffered 

Question 

from gross misrule. The oppression of the Turks became 

so grinding and was accompanied by acts so barbarous and inhuman 

that the peasants finally rebelled. These peasants were Slavs, and 

„. . as such were aided by Slavs from neighboring regions, Bosnia, 

The insur- -' t. b b > i 

rection of Serbia, and Bulgaria. They were made all the more bitter 
erzegovma ]-,g(,g^^gg ^]^gy ^^^ Slavs in Serbia comparatively contented, 
as these were largely self- governed. Why should not they themselves 
enjoy as good conditions as others? Religious and racial hatred 
of Christian and Slav against the infidel Turk flamed up throughout 
the peninsula. Christians could not rest easy witnessing the out- 
rages committed upon their co-religionists. And just at this time 
those outrages attained a ferocity that shocked all Europe. 

Early in 1876 the Christians in Bulgaria, a large province of Euro- 
pean Turkey, rose against the Turkish officials, killing some of them. 

The Bui- '^^^ revenge taken by the Turks was of incredible atrocity. 

garian Pouring regular troops and the ferocious irregulars called 

atrocities Bashi-Bazouks into the province, they butchered thousands 
with every refinement or coarseness of brutality. In the valley of the 



THE RUSSO-TURKISH WAR 617 

Maritza all but fifteen of eighty villages were destroyed. In Batak, 
a town of 7000 inhabitants, five thousand men, women, and children 
were savagely slaughtered with indescribable treachery and cruelty. 

These Bulgarian atrocities thrilled all Europe with horror. Glad- 
stone, emerging from retirement, denounced "the unspeakable 
Turk," in a flaming pamphlet. He demanded that England cease 
to support a government which was an affront to the laws of Gladstone's 
God, and urged that the Turks be expelled from Europe "bag denunciation 
and baggage." The public opinion of Europe was aroused. 

In July, 1876, Serbia and Montenegro declared war against Turkey, 
and the insurrection of the Bulgarians became general. The Russian 
people became intensely excited in their sympathy with their ^^^^-^^ ^^^ 
co-religionists and their fellow-Slavs. Finally the Russian Montenegro 
government declared war upon Turkey, April 24, 1877. The ^"^^'^w^"^ 
war lasted until the close of January, 1878. The chief feature of the 
campaign was the famous siege of Plevna which the Turks defended 
for five months but which finally surrendered. This broke Russia de- 
the back of Turkish resistance and the Russians marched blares war 
rapidly toward Constantinople. The Sultan sought peace, and on 
March 3, 1878, the Treaty of San Stefano was concluded between 
Russia and Turkey. By this treaty the Porte recognized Treaty of 
the complete independence of Serbia, Montenegro, and Rou- ^^'^ stefano 
mania, and made certain cessions of territory to the two former 
states. The main feature of the treaty concerned Bulgaria, which 
was made a self-governing state, tributary 'to the Sultan. Its 
frontiers were very liberally drawn. Its territory was to include 
nearly all of European Turkey, between Roumania and Serbia to the 
north, and Greece to the south. Only a broken strip across the 
peninsula, from Constantinople west to the Adriatic, was to be left 
to Turkey. The new state therefore was to include not only Bulgaria 
proper, but Roumelia to the south and most of Macedonia. Glad- 
stone's desire for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe "bag and 
baggage" was nearly realized. 

But this treaty was not destined to be carried out. The other 
powers objected to having the Eastern Question solved without their 
consent. England particularly, fearing Russian expansion j. j^^^ 
southward toward the Mediterranean, and believing that demands its 
Bulgaria and the other states would be merely tools of Russia, 
declared that the arrangements concerning the peninsula must be 



THE CONGRESS OF BERLIN 619 

determined by the great European powers, that the Treaty of San 
Stefano must be submitted to a general congress on the ground that, 
according to the international law of Europe, the Eastern Question 
could not be settled by one nation but only by the concert of powers, 
as it affected them all. Austria joined the protest, wishing a part 
of the spoils of Turkey for herself. Russia naturally objected to 
allowing those who had not fought to determine the outcome of her 
victory. But as the powers were insistent, particularly England, 
then under the Beaconsfield administration, and as she was in 
no position for further hostilities, she yielded. The Congress of 
Berlin was held under the presidency of Bismarck, Beacons- ^, _ 
field himself representing England. It drew up the Treaty of gress of 
Berlin, which was signed July 13, 1878. By this treaty Mon- ^"^"^ 
tenegro, Serbia, and Roumania were rendered completely independent 
of Turkey. But Bulgaria was divided into three parts, one of which, 
called Macedonia, was handed back to Turkey, and another, called 
Eastern Roumelia, was to be still subject to the Sultan but to have 
a Christian governor appointed by him. The third part, Bulgaria, 
was still to be nominally a part of Turkey but was to elect its own 
prince and was to be self-governing. The powers in making these 
arrangements were thinking neither of Turkey, nor of the happiness of 
the people who had long been oppressed by Turkey. The Congress of 
Berlin, like the Congress of Vienna of 18 15, was indifferent or hostile 
to the legitimate national aspirations of oppressed peoples, and there- 
fore its work has had the same fate, it has been undone in one par- 
ticular and another and the process is continuing at the present 
moment, not yet quite completed. As far as humanitarian consider- 
ations were concerned the disposition of Macedonia was a „ 

Macedonia 

colossal blunder. Its people would have been far happier 
had they formed a part of Bulgaria. Owing to the rival ambitions 
of the great powers Macedonia's Christians were destined long to 
suffer an odious oppression from which more fortunate Balkan 
Christians were free. 

The same powers found the occasion convenient for taking various 
Turkish possessions for themselves. Austria was invited to "oc- 
cupy" and administer Bosnia and Herzegovina. England was to 
"occupy" Cyprus. All these territories were nominally still a part 
of the Turkish Empire. Their position was anomalous, unclear, and 
destined to create trouble in the future. 



620 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 

On the other hand, the benefits assured by the Treaty of BerUn were 
, , ^ considerable and they were due solely to Russia's interven- 

Advantages ■' ■' 

of the Treaty tion, though Russia herself drew little direct profit from her 
° ^'"^ war. Three Balkan states, long in process of formation, 

Montenegro, Serbia, and Roumania, were declared entirely independ- 
ent, and a new state, Bulgaria, had been called into existence, 
though still slightly subject to the Porte. As a result of the treaty, 
European Turkey was greatly reduced, its population having shrunk 
from seventeen millions to six millions. In other words eleven million 
people or more had been emancipated from Turkish control. 



BULGARIA AFTER 1878 

The Treaty of Berlin, while it brought substantial advantages, did 
not bring peace to the Balkan peninsula. Though diminishing the 
Unsatisfied posscssions of the Sultan, it did not satisfy the ambitions of 
ambitions ^he various peoples, it did not expel the Turk from Europe 
and thus cut out the root of the evil. Abundant sources of trouble 
remained, as the next forty years were to show. The history of the 
various states since 1878, both in internal affairs and in their foreign 
relations, has been agitated, yet, despite disturbances, considerable 
progress has been made. 

Bulgaria, of which Europe knew hardly anything in 1876, was, in 
1878, made an autonomous state, but it did not attain complete inde- 
pendence, as it was nominally a part of the Turkish Empire, to which 
it was to pay tribute. The new principality owed its existence to 
Alexander of Russia, and for several years Russian influence predominated 
Battenberg \y^ j^. It was Started on its career by Russian officials. A 
constitution was drawn up establishing an assembly called the 
Sobranje. This assembly chose as Prince of Bulgaria, Alexander of 
Battenberg, a young German of twenty-two, a relative of the Russian 
Imperial House, supposedly acceptable to the Czar (April, 1879). 

The Bulgarians were grateful to the Russians for their aid. They 
recognized those who remained after the war was over as having 
Friction ^^ the rights of Bulgarian citizens, among others the right to 

between the }^old office. Russians held important positions in the Bulgarian 
and the ministry. They organized the military forces and became 

Russians officers. Before long, however, friction developed, and 

gratitude gave way to indignation at the high-handed conduct of 



UNION OF THE TWO BULGARIAS 621 

the Russians, who plainly regarded Bulgaria as a sort of province or 
outpost of Russia, to be administered according to Russian ideas 
and interests. The Russian ministers were arrogant, and made it 
evident that they regarded the Czar, not Prince Alexander, as their 
superior, whose wishes they were bound to execute. The Prince, the 
native army officers, and the people found their position increasingly 
humiliating. Finally, in 1883, the Russian ministers were virtually 
forced to resign, and the Prince now relied upon Bulgarian leaders. 
This caused an open breach with Russia which was further widened 
by the action of the people of Eastern Roumelia in 1885 in expressing 
their desire to be united with Bulgaria. Prince Alexander agreed 
to this and assumed the title of "Prince of the Two Bulgarias." 
The powers protested against this unification, and would not recog- 
nize the change, but they refrained from doing anything further. 

Russia, however, incensed at the growing independence of the new 
state, which she looked upon as a mere satellite, resolved to read her 
a lesson in humility by organizing a conspiracy. The con- . . 
spirators seized Prince Alexander in his bedroom in the dead Prince 
of night, forced him to sign his abdication, and then carried ^^^^^^^' 
him off to Russian soil. Alexander was detained in Russia a short 
time, until it was supposed that the Russian party was thoroughly 
established in power in Bulgaria, when he was permitted to go to 
Austria. He was immediately recalled to Bulgaria, returned to 
receive an immense ovation, and then, at the height of his popularity, 
in a moment of weakness, abdicated, apparently overwhelmed by the 
continued opposition of Russia (September 7, 1886). The situation 
was most critical. Two parties advocating opposite policies con- 
fronted each other; one pro- Russian, believing that Bulgaria should 
accept in place of Alexander any prince whom the Czar should choose 
for her ; the other national and independent, rallying to the cry of 
" Bulgaria for the Bulgarians." The latter speedily secured control, 
fortunate in that it had a remarkable leader in the person of Stam- 
buloff, a native, a son of an innkeeper, a man of extraordinary firm- 
ness, suppleness, and courage, vigorous and intelligent. Ferdinand of 
Through him Russian efforts to regain control of the princi- Saxe-Coburg 
pality were foiled and a new ruler was secured. Prince Ferdinand of 
Saxe-Coburg, twenty-six years of age, who was elected unanimously 
by the Sobranje, July 7, 1887. Russia protested against this action, 
and none of the great powers recognized Ferdinand. 



622 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 

Stambuloff was the most forceful statesman developed in the 
history of the Balkan states. He succeeded in keeping Bulgaria 

Dictatorship sclf -independent. During the earlier years of his rule Ferdi- 

of Stambuloff nand relied upon him, and, indeed, owed to him his continuance 
on the throne. He won the pretentious title of "the Bulgarian Bis- 
marck." His methods resembled those of his Teutonic prototype 
in more than one respect. For seven years he was practicall)^ dictator 
of Bulgaria. Russian plots continued. He repressed them piti- 
lessly. His one fundamental principle was Bulgaria for the Bul- 
garians. His rule was one of terror, of suppression of liberties, of 
unscrupulousness, directed to patriotic ends. His object was to rid 
Bulgaria of Russian, as of Turkish, control. Bulgaria under him 
increased in wealth and population. The army received a modern 
equipment, universal military service was instituted, commerce 
was encouraged, railroads were built, popular education begun, and 
the capital, Sofia, a dirty, wretched Turkish village, made over into 
one of the attractive capitals of Europe. But Stambuloff made a 

Murder of multitude of enemies, and as a result he fell from power in 1894. 

stambuloff jj^ ^}^g following year he was foully murdered in the streets of 
Sofia. But he had done his work thoroughly, and it remains the 
basis of the life of Bulgaria to-day. The Turkish sovereignty was 
merely nominal, and even that was not destined to endure long. 
In March, 1896, the election of Ferdinand as prince was finally 
recognized by the great powers. The preceding years had been 
immensely significant. They had thoroughly consolidated the unity 
of Bulgaria, had permitted her institutions to strike root, had ac- 
customed her to independence of action, to self-reliance. Those 
years, too, had been used for the enrichment of the national life 
with the agencies of the modern world, schools, railways, an army. 
Bulgaria had a population of about four million, a capital in Sofia, 
an area of about 38,000 square miles. She aspired to annex Mace- 
donia, where, however, she was to encounter many rivals. She 
only awaited a favorable opportunity to renounce her nominal 
connection with Turkey. The opportunity came in 1908. On 
October 5th of that year Bulgaria declared her independence, and her 
Prince assumed the title of Czar. The later history of Bulgaria may 
best be described in connection with the Balkan wars of 1912 and 
1913- 



THE KIXGDOxM OF ROUMANIA 623 

ROUMANIA AND SERBIA AFTER 1878 

At the outbreak of the Russo-Turkish war in 1877, Roumania de- 
clared herself entirely independent of Turkey. This independence 
was recognized by the Sultan and the powers at the Congress of 
Berlin on condition that all citizens should enjoy legal equality, 
whatever their religion, a condition designed to protect the Jews, 
who were numerous, but who had previously been without political 
rights. 

In 1 88 1 Roumania proclaimed herself a kingdom, and her prince 
henceforth styled himself King Charles I. The royal crown was 
made of steel from a Turkish gun captured at Plevna, a perpet- 
ual reminder of what was her war of independence. Rou- proclaimed a 
mania has created an army on Prussian models of about ^'°2*^°™ 
500,000 men, has built railroads and highways, and has, by agrarian 
legislation, improved the condition of the peasantry. The population 
has steadily increased, and now numbers over seven millions. The 
area of Roumania is about 53,000 square miles. While mainly an 
agricultural country, in recent years her industrial development has 
been notable, and her commerce is more important than that of any 
other Balkan state. Her government is a constitutional monarchy, 
with legislative chambers. The most important political question 
in recent years has been a demand for the reform of the electoral 
system, which resembles the Prussian three-class system, and which 
gives the direct vote to only a small fraction of the population. In 
iqo7 the peasantry rose in insurrection, demanding agrarian Agrarian dis- 
reforms. As more than four-fifths of the population live upon turbances 
the land, and as the population has steadily increased, the holding 
of each peasant has correspondingly decreased. A military force 
of 140,000 men was needed to quell the revolt. After having restored 
order, the ministry introduced and carried various measures intended 
to bring relief to the peasants from their severest burdens. 

Serbia, also, was recognized as independent by the Berlin Treaty in 
1878. She proclaimed herself a kingdom in 1882. She has had a 
turbulent history in recent years. In 1885 she declared war against 
Bulgaria, only to be unexpectedly and badly defeated. The financial 
policy was deplorable. In seven years the debt increased 
from seven million to three hundred and twelve million francs. 
The scandals of the private life of King Milan utterly discredited the 



624 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 

monarchy. He was forced to abdicate in 1889, and was succeeded 
by his twelve-year-old son, Alexander I, who was brutally murdered 
in 1903 with his wife, Queen Draga, in a midnight palace revolution. 
The new king, Peter I, found his position for several years most 
unstable. A new and important chapter in the history of Serbia 
began with the Balkan War of 1912. 



GREECE AFTER 1833 

In January, 1833, Otto, second son of Louis I, the King of Bavaria, 
became King of Greece, a country of great poverty, with a population 
of about 750,000, unaccustomed to the reign of law and order usual in 
western Europe. The kingdom was small, with unsatisfactory bound- 
aries, lacking Thessaly, which was peopled entirely by Greeks. The 
country had been devastated by a long and unusually sanguinary war. 
Internal conditions were anarchic; Brigandage was rife ; the debt 
was large. The problem was, how to make out of such unpromising 
materials a prosperous and progressive state. 

King Otto reigned from 1833 to 1862. He was aided in his govern- 
ment by many Bavarians, who filled important positions in the army 
Reign of and the civil service. This German influence was a primary 

^"° ^ cause of the unpopularity of the new regime. The beginnings 

were made, however, in the construction of a healthy national life. 
Athens was made the capital, and a university was established there. 
A police system was organized ; a national bank created. In 1844 
Otto was forced to consent to the conversion of his absolute monarchy 
into a constitutional one. A parliament with two chambers, the 
Deputies being chosen by universal suffrage, was instituted. The 
political education of the Greeks then began. 

From the reopening of the Eastern Question by the Crimean. war 
Greece hoped to profit by the enlargement of her boundaries. The 
great powers, however, thought otherwise, and forced her to remain 
quiet. Because the Government did not defy Europe and insist 
Overthrow upon her rights, which would have been an insane proceeding, it 
of Otto became very unpopular. For this reason, as well as for des- 

potic tendencies. Otto was driven from power in 1862 by an insur- 
rection, and left Greece, never to return. 

A new king was secured in the person of a Danish prince, second 
son of the then King of Denmark. The new king, George I, ruled 



THE PROBLEM OF MACEDONIA 625 

from 1863 to 191 3. That his popularity might be strengthened 
at the very outset, England in 1864 ceded to the kingdom the The Ionian 
Ionian Islands, which she had held since 1 8 15. This was the first islands 
enlargement of the kingdom since its foundation. A new constitution 
was established (1864) which abolished the Senate and left all parlia- 
mentary power in the hands of a single assembly, the Boule, elected 
by universal suffrage, and consisting of 192 members, with a four- 
year term. In 1881, mainly through the exertions of England, 
the Sultan was induced to cede Thessaly to Greece, and thus a Annexation 
second enlargement of territory occurred. This was in accord- °^ Thessaly 
ance with the promise of the Congress of Berlin that the Greek 
frontier should be "rectified." 

In 1897 Greece declared war against Turkey, aiming at the annexa- 
tion of Crete, which had risen in insurrection against Turkey. Greece 
was easily defeated, and was forced to cede certain parts of Thessaly 
to Turkey and give up the project of the annexation of Crete. After 
long negotiations among the powers, the latter island was made 
autonomous under the suzerainty of the Sultan, and under the 
direct administration of Prince George, a son of the King of Greece, 
who remained in power until 1906. A new problem, the Cretan, was 
thus pushed into the foreground of Greek politics. 

The financial condition of Greece is not sound. Her debt has 
grown enormously owing to armaments, the building of railroads, 
and the digging of canals. She has, however, increased in ^^ ^j . 
population and much has been accomplished ' in the direction outside of 
of popular education. Several millions of Greeks live outside ^^^^'^^ 
the Greek kingdom. Those inside are ambitious to have them 
included. 

Serbian, Bulgarian, and Greek rivalries met in the plains of Mace- 
donia, which each country coveted and which was inhabited by 
representatives of all these peoples, inextricably intermingled. The 
problem of Macedonia was further complicated by the rivalry of the 
great powers and by the revolution which broke out in Turkey itself 
in 1908. 

REVOLUTION IN TURKEY 

The Eastern Question entered upon a new and startling phase in 
the summer of 1908. In July a swift, sweeping, and pacific revolution 
occurred in Turkey. The Young Turks, a revolutionary, consti- 



626 



THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 



tutional party, dominated by the political principles of western 

Europe, seized control of the government, to the complete surprise of 
The Young the diplomatists and public of Europe. This party consisted 
Turks Qf those who had been driven from Turkey by the despotism 

of the Sultan, Abdul Hamid II (ab'-dol ha-med'), and were 

resident abroad, chiefly in 

Paris, and of those who, still 

living in Turkey, dissembled 

their opinions and were able to 

escape expulsion. Its mem- 
bers desired the overthrow of 

the despotic, corrupt, and in- 
efficient government, and the 

creation in its place of a mod- 
ern liberal system, capable, 

by varied and thoroughgoing 

reforms, of ranging Turkey 

among progressive nations. 

Weaving their conspiracy in 

silence and with remarkable 
Revolution adroitness, they suc- 
of July, ceeded in drawing into 

'^° it the Turkish army, 

hitherto the solid bulwark of 

the Sultan's power. Then, at 

the ripe moment, the army 

refused to obey the Sultan's 

orders, and the conspirators 

demanded peremptorily by 

telegraph that the Sultan 

restore the Constitution of 1876, a constitution which had been 

granted by the Sultan in that year merely to enable him to weather 

a crisis, and which, having quickly served the purpose, had been 

immediately suspended and had remained suspended ever since. 

The Sultan, seeing the ominous defection of the army, complied at 
Restoration ^"^^ ^^^^ ^^^ demands of the Young Turks, "restored" on 
of the Con- July 24 the Constitution of 1876, and ordered elections for a 
parliament, which should meet in November. Thus an 

odious tyranny was instantly swept away. It was a veritable coup 




Abdl'l Hamid II 
From a photograph by W. and D. Downey. 



stitution 



THE TURKISH REVOLUTION 627 

d'etat, this time effected, not by some would-be autocrat, but by 
the army, usually the chief support of despotism or of the authority 
of the monarch, now, apparently, the main instrument for the 
achievement of freedom for the democracy. This military revolu- 
tion, completely successful and almost bloodless, was received with 
incredible enthusiasm throughout the entire breadth of the 
Sultan's dominions. Insurgents and soldiers, Mohammedans unan[mity 
and Christians, Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, Albanians, Arme- °* **^'^ 

movement 

nians, Turks, all joined in jubilant celebrations of the release 
from intolerable conditions. The most astonishing feature was 
the complete subsidence of the racial and religious hatreds which had 
hitherto torn and ravaged the Empire from end to end. The 
revolution proved to be the most fraternal movement in modern 
history. Picturesque and memorable were the scenes of universal 
reconciliation. The ease and suddenness with which this astounding 
change was effected proved the universality of the detestation of the 
reign and methods of Abdul Hamid II throughout all his provinces 
and among all his peoples. 

Was this the beginning of a new era or was it the beginning of the 
end of the Turkish Empire? It will be more convenient to examine 
this question a little later. 

REFERENCES 

Greek War of Independence:' Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 135-167; 
Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, Chap. XV. 

Crimean War : Walpole, History of England Since 1815, Vol. VI, Chap. 
XXIV; Fyffe, pp. 824-865; Phillips, pp. 332-360; Murdock, Tlie Reconstruction 
of Europe, pp. 16-95; McCarthy, History of Our Own Titnes, Vol. I, pp. 433- 
524; Forbes et al.. The Balkans. 

Reopening of the Eastern Question, 1877-1878 : Rose, Development of the 
European Nations, Vol. I, pp. 184-224; McCarthy, Vol. II, pp. 574-595. 

Russo-TuRKiSH War and the Congress of Berlin : Rose, Vol. I, pp. 225- 
298; McCarthy, Vol. II, pp. 595-613; Walpole, History of Twenty-five Years, 
Vol. IV, pp. 98-187; Fyffe, pp. 1022-1052; Phillips, pp. 486-523. 

Bulgaria: Rose, Vol. I, pp. 264-299; Cambridge Modern History, Yol. XII, 
pp. 404-411; Seignobos, pp. 664-669; Miller, The Balkans, pp. 215-248. 

Roumania : Seignobos, pp. 640-648. 

Serbia and Montenegro : Seignobos, pp. 657-664. 

Greece : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 419-428. 



CHAPTER XXXII 
RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER I 

Russia at the fall of Napoleon was the largest state in Europe, and 
was a still larger Asiatic empire. It extended in unbroken stretch 
from the German Confederation to the Pacific Ocean. Its population 
was about 45,000,000. Its European territory covered about 
2,000,000 square miles. It was inhabited by a variet}^ of races, but 
the principal one was the Slavic. Though there were many religions, 
the religion of the court and of more than two- thirds of the population 
was the so-called Greek Orthodox form of Christianity. Though 
various languages were spoken, Russian was the chief one. The 
Russians had conquered many peoples in various directions. A 
considerable part of the former Kingdom of Poland had been ac- 
Russian quired in the three partitions at the close of the eighteenth 

conquests ccntury, and more in 1815, Here the people spoke a different 
language, the Polish, and adhered to a different religion, the Roman 
Catholic. In the Baltic provinces, Esthonia, Livonia, and Courland, 
the upper class was of German origin and spoke the German lan- 
guage, while the mass of peasants were Finns and Lithuanians, 
speaking different tongues. All the inhabitants were Lutherans. 
Finland had recently been conquered from Sweden. The languages 
spoken there were Swedish and Finnish, and the religion was Lu- 
theran. To the east and south were peoples of Asiatic origin, many 
of them Mohammedans in religion. There were in certain sections 
considerable bodies of Jews. 

All these dissimilar elements were bound together by their alle- 
giance to the sovereign, the Czar, a monarch of absolute, unlimited 
power. 

There were two classes of society in Russia — the nobility and the 
peasantry. The large majority of the latter were serfs of the Czar 

628 



LIBERALISM OF ALEXANDER I 629 

and the nobility. The nobility numbered about 140,000 families. 
The nobles secured offices in the army and the civil service. They 
were exempt from many taxes, and enjoyed certain monopolies. 

™ . , ■ r ■ , , r^, ThenobiUty 

1 heir power over their serfs was extensive and despotic. They 
enforced obedience to their orders by the knout and by banish- 
ment to Siberia. The middle class of well-to-do and educated 
people, increasingly important in the other countries of Europe, 
practically did not exist in Russia. Russia was an agricultural 
country, whose agriculture, moreover, was very primitive and 
inefficient. It was a nation of serfs and of peasants little jhe 
better off than the serfs. This class was wretched, unedu- peasantry, 
cated, indolent, prone to drink excessively. In the "mir," or village 
community, however, it possessed a rudimentary form of com- 
munism and limited self-government. 

Over this vast and ill-equipped nation ruled the Autocrat of All the 
Russias, or Czar, an absolute monarch, whose decisions, expressed in 
the form of ukases or decrees,' were the law of the land. The Alexander I 
ruler in 181 5 was Alexander I, a man thirty-eight years of (1801-1825) 
age. 

Alexander stood forth as the most enlightened sovereign on any of 
the great thrones of Europe. In the reorganization of Europe in 18 14 
and 1 81 5 he was, on the whole, a liberal force. He favored generous 
terms to the conquered French, he insisted that Louis XVIII should 
grant a constitution to the French people, he encouraged the aspira- 
tions of the German people for a larger political life. 

He showed his liberal tendencies even more unmistakably in his 
Polish policy. He succeeded at the Congress of Vienna in securing 
most of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw which he then transformed „ . ^ 

^ Poland 

into the Kingdom of Poland. This was a state of 3,000,000 
inhabitants with an area less than one-sixth the size of the former 
Polish kingdom, but containing the Polish capital, Warsaw. This 
was henceforth to be an independent kingdom, not a part of Russia. 
The only connection between the two was in the person of the ruler. 
The Czar of Russia was to be King of Poland. Alexander granted 
a constitution to this state, creating a parliament, and promising 
liberty of the press and of religion. The Polish language was to be 
the official language. Poland enjoyed freer institutions at this 
moment than did either Prussia or Austria. The franchise was 
wider than that of England or France. Apparently, also, Alexander ' 



630 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

considered his Polish experiment as preliminary to an introduction 
of similar reforms in Russia also. 

But Alexander's character was unstable. He was impressionable, 

changeable, easily discouraged. Metternich made it his especial 

Alexander business to frighten him out of his liberalism, which was the 

becomes chief obstacle in Europe to his policy of resolute reaction. He 

reac lonary ccasclessly played upon Alexander's essentially timid nature 

and it took him only three years to accomplish this conversion. 

Alexander then became a vigorous supporter of Metternich's policy 

of intervention which expressed itself in the various congresses and 

which made the name of the Holy Alliance a by-word among men. 

He became disappointed over his Polish experiment and began to 

infringe upon the liberties he himself had granted. He grew more 

and more reactionary and when he died, on December i, 1825, he 

left an administration dominated by a totally different spirit from 

that which had prevailed in the earlier years. 

THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS I 

He was succeeded by his brother Nicholas I, whose reign of thirty 
years, 1825-1855, was eventful. It was one of uncompromising 
Nicholas I absolutism, both at home and abroad. Nicholas was the great 
(1825-1855) bulwark of monarchical authority in Europe for thirty years. 
His system of government was one of remorseless, undeviating 
repression, through the agencies of a brutal police and an elaborate 
Systematic censorship. Punishments for Liberals of any sort were of 
repression great severity. The most harmless word might mean exile 
to Siberia, without any kind of preliminary trial. In twenty years 
perhaps 150,000 persons were thus exiled. Tens of thousands lan- 
guished in the prisons of Russia. Religious persecution was added 
to political. 

Nicholas's foreign policy was marked by the same characteristics, 
and made him hated throughout Europe as the most brutal autocrat 
His foreign on the Continent. He suppressed the Polish insurrection of 
poUcy 1830-1831, abolished the constitution granted by Alexander I, 

and incorporated Poland in Russia, thus ending the history of that 
kingdom, a history of only fifteen years. He waged two wars against 
Turkey, previously described, one in 1 828-1 829, and one in 1853- 1855. 
He interfered decisively to suppress the Hungarian revolutionists in 



THE EMANCIPATION OF THE SERFS 631 

1849. He died in the middle of the Crimean War, though not until it 
was apparent that the prestige of his country, so overwhelming since 
Napoleon's flight from Moscow in 181 2, had been completely 
shattered. This war was not only a defeat but a disillusionment. 
The Government was proved to be as incompetent and as impotent 
as it was reactionary. It was clear that the state was honeycombed 
with abuses which must be reformed if it was to prosper. 

THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II 

That the time for changes had come was clearly seen by the next 
occupant of the throne, Alexander II, who ruled from 1855 to 1881. 
Of an open mind, and desirous of ameliorating the conditions Alexander 11 
of Russian life, he for some years followed a policy of reform. (1855-1881) . 
He relaxed the censorship of the press aud removed most of the 
restrictions which had been imposed upon the universities and upon 
travel. Particularly did he address himself to the question of 
serfdom. 

Nearly all, practically nine-tenths, of the arable land of Russia, was 
owned by the imperial family and by the one hundred and forty 
thousand families of the nobility. The land was, therefore, „ 

■' ' Prevailing 

generally held in large estates. It was owned by a small system of 
minority ; it was tilled by the millions of Russia who were '^°'* tenure 
serfs. It was easy for the Emperor to free the crown serfs, about 
23,000,000, since no one could question the riglit of the state to do 
what it would with its own. Consequently the crown serfs were freed 
by a series of measures covering several years, 1859 to 1866. But the 
Edict of Emancipation, which was to constitute Alexander II's most 
legitimate title to fame, concerned the serfs of private land- xhe problem 
owners, the nobles. There were about 23,000,000 of these, °* serfdom 
also. These private landlords reserved a part of their land for 
themselves, requiring the serfs to work it without pay, generally three 
days a week. The rest of the land was turned over to the serfs, who 
cultivated it on their own account, getting therefrom what support 
they could, hardly enough, as a matter of fact, for sustenance. The 
serfs were not slaves in the strict sense of the word. The}' could 
not be sold separately. But they were attached to the soil, could not 
leave it without the consent of the owner, and passed, if he sold his 
estate, to the new owner. The landlord otherwise had practically 



632 



RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 



unlimited authority over his serfs. They possessed no rights which, 
in practice, he was bound to respect. Sucli a system, it is needless 
to say, offended the conscience of the age. 

On March 3, 1861, the Edict of Emancipation was issued. It abol- 
ished serfdom throughout the Empire, and it won for Alexander the 
The Edict of popular title of "the Czar Liberator." This manifesto did 
Emancipation ^ot merely declare the serfs free men ; but it undertook also 
to solve the far more 
difficult problem of the 
ownership of the soil. 
The Czar felt that merely 
to give the serfs freedom, 
and to leave all the land 
in the possession of the 
nobles, would mean the 
creation of a great pro- 
letariat possessing no 
property, therefore likely 
to fall at once into a posi- 
tion of economic depend- 
ence upon the nobles, 
which would make the 
gift of freedom a mere 
mockery. Moreover, the 
peasants were firmly con- 
vinced that they 
were the rightful 
owners of the lands 
which they and their an- 
cestors for centuries had 
lived upon and cultivated, 

and the fact that the landlords were legally the owners did not alter 
their opinion. To give them freedom without land, leaving that with 
the nobles, who desired to retain it, would be bitterly resented as 
making their condition worse than ever. On the other hand, to give 
them the land with their freedom would mean the ruin of the nobility 
as a class, considered essential to the state. The consequence of 
this conflict of interests was a compromise, satisfactory to neither 
party, but more favorable to the nobility than to the peasants. 



The land 
problem 




ALf:XAXDER 



THE QUESTION OF THE LAND 633 

The lands were divided into two parts. The landlords were to 
keep one ; the other was to go to the peasants either individually 
or collectively as members of the village community or mir to Division of 
which they belonged. But this was not given them outright ; ^^^ ^^'^^ 
the peasant and the village must pay the landlord for the land 
assigned them. As they were not in a position to do this the state 
was to advance the money, getting it back from the peasant and the 
mir in easy installments. These installments were to run for forty- 
nine years, at the end of which time they would cease and the peasant 
and the mir would then own outright the lands they had acquired. 

This arrangement was a great disappointment to the peasants. 
Their newly acquired freedom seemed a doubtful boon in the light of 
this method of dividing the land. Indeed, they could not see ^. 

•^ Disappoint- 

that they were profiting from the change. Personal liberty ment of the 
would not mean much, when the conditions of earning a liveli- P^^^^°'''y 
hood became harder rather than lighter. The peasants regarded 
the land as their own. But the state guaranteed forever a part to the 
landlords and announced that the peasants must pay for the part 
assigned to themselves. To the peasants this seemed sheer robbery. 
Moreover, as the division worked out, they found that the}^ had less 
land for their own use than in the pre-emancipation days, and that 
they had to pay the landlords, through the state, more than ^^ , ^ 
the lands which they did receive were worth. The Edict of question not 
Emancipation did not therefore bring either peace or pros- ^°'^®^ 
perity to the peasants. The land question became steadily more 
acute during the next fifty years owing to the vast increase of popu- 
lation and the consequent greater pressure upon the land. The 
Russian peasant lived necessarily upon the verge of starvation. 

The emancipation of the serfs is seen, therefore, not to have been 
an unalloyed boon. Yet Russia gained morally in the esteem of 
other nations by abolishing an indefensible wrong. Theoretically, 
at least, every man was free. Moreover, the peasants, though 
faring ill, yet fared better than had the peasants of Prussia and 
Austria at the time of their liberation. 

The abolition of serfdom was the greatest act of Alexander II's 
reign, but it was only one of several liberal measures enacted at this 
time of general enthusiasm. A certain amount of local self- Domestic 
government was granted, reforms in the judicial system were refonns 
carried through, based upon a study of the systems of Europe and the 



634 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

United States, the censorship of the press was relaxed, educational 
facilities were somewhat developed. 

This hopeful era of reform was, however, soon over, and a period of 
reaction began, which characterized the latter half of Alexander's 
End of the reign and ended in his assassination in 1881. There were 
era of several causes for this change : the vacillating character of the 

re orm monarch himself, taking fright at his own work ; the disap- 

pointment felt by many who had expected a millennium, but who 
found it not ; the intense dislike of the privileged and conservative 
classes for the measures just described. 

Just at this time, when the attitude of the Emperor was changing, 
when public opinion was in this fluid, uncertain state, occurred an 
The Polish event which immensely strengthened the reactionary forces, a 
insurrection new insurrection of Poland. After the failure of their attempt 
° ^ ^ to achieve independence in 1831 the Poles had remained quiet, 

the quiet of despair. As long as Nicholas I lived they were ruled 
with the greatest severity, and they could not but see the impracti- 
cability of any attempt to throw off their chains. But the accession 
of Alexander II aroused hopes of better conditions. The spirit of 
nationalism revived, greatly encouraged by the success of the same 
spirit elsewhere. The Italians had just realized their aspiration, 
the creation of an Italian nation — not solely by their own efforts but 
by the aid of foreign nations. Might not the Poles hope for as much ? 
Alexander would not for a moment entertain the favorite idea of the 
Poles, that they should be independent. He emphatically told them 
that such a notion was an idle dream, that they "must abandon all 
thoughts of independence, now and forever impossible." This un- 
compromising attitude, coupled with repressive measures, irritated 
the Poles to the point of desperation. Finally in 1863 an insurrection 
broke out, aiming at independence. It was put down with vigor and 
without mercy. The only hope for the Poles lay in foreign interv.en- 
tion, but in this they were bitterly disappointed. England, France, 
and Austria intervened three times in their behalf, but only by dip- 
lomatic notes, making no attempt to give emphasis to their notes by 
a show of force. Russia, seeing this, and supported by Prussia, 
treated their intervention as an impertinence, and proceeded to 
wreak her vengeance. It was a fearful punishment she meted out. 
A process of Russification was now vigorously pursued. The 
Russian language was prescribed for the correspondence of the 



THE RISE OF NIHILISM 635 

officials and the lectures of the university professors, and the use 
of Polish was forbidden in churches, schools, theaters, news- a policy of 
papers, in business signs, in fact, everywhere. Russification 

It was not long before Alexander, always vacillating, gave up all 
dallying with reforms and relapsed into the traditional repressive 
ways of Russian monarchs. This reaction aroused intense discontent 
and engendered a movement which threatened the very existence of 
the monarchy itself, namely. Nihilism. 

The Nihilists belonged to the intellectual class of Russia. Reading 
the works of the more radical philosophers and scientists of western 
Europe, and reflecting upon the foundations of their own Rise of 
national institutions and conditions, they became most de- Nihilism 
structive critics. They were extreme individualists who tested every 
human institution and custom by reason. As few Russian institu- 
tions could meet such a test, the Nihilists condemned them all. 
Theirs was an attitude, first of intellectual challenge, then of revolt 
against the whole established order. Shortly, Socialism was grafted 
upon this hatred of all established institutions. In the place of the 
existing society, which must be swept away, a new society was to be 
erected, based on socialistic principles. Thus the movement entered 
upon a new phase. It ceased to be merely critical and destructive. 
It became constructive as well, in short, a political party with a 
positive program, a party very small but resolute and reckless, 
willing to resort to any means to achieve its aims. 

This party now determined to institute an educational campaign 
in Russia, realizing that nothing could be done unless the millions of 
peasants were shaken out of their stolid acquiescence in the Nihilist 
prevalent order which weighed so heavily upon them. This propaganda 
extraordinary movement, called "going in among the people," 
became very active after 1870. Young men and women, all belong- 
ing to the educated class, and frequently to noble families, became 
day laborers and peasants in order to mingle with the people, to 
arouse them to action, "to found," as one of their documents said, 
"on the ruins of the present social organization the empire of the 
working classes." They showed the self-sacrifice, the heroism of the 
missionary laboring under the most discouraging conditions. It is 
estimated that, between 1872 and 1878, between two and three 
thousand such missionaries were active in this propaganda. Their 
efforts, however, were not rewarded with success. The peasantry 



636 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

remained stolid, if not contented. Moreover, this campaign of 
education and persuasion was broken up wherever possible by the 
ubiquitous and lawless police. Many were imprisoned or exiled to 
Siberia. 

A pacific propaganda being impossible, one of violence seemed to 
the more energetic spirits the only alternative. As the Government 
A policy of held the people in a subjection unworthy of human beings, 
terrorism a,s it employed all its engines of power against every one who 
demanded reform of any kind, as, in short, it ruled by terror, these 
reformers resolved to fight it with terror as the only method possible. 
The "Terrorists" were not bloodthirsty or cruel by nature. They 
simply believed that no progress whatever could be made in raising 
Russia from her misery except by getting rid of the more unscrupulous 
officials. They perfected their organization and entered upon a 
period of violence. Numerous attempts, often successful, were 
made to assassinate the high officials, chiefs of police, and others who 
had rendered themselves particularly odious. In turn many of the 
revolutionists were executed. 

Finally the terrorists determined to kill the Czar as the only way 

of overthrowing the whole hated arbitrary and oppressive system. 

Several attempts were made. In April, 1879, a schoolmaster, 

upon°the Solovicf, fired five shots at the Emperor, none of which took 

Emperor's effect. In December of the same year a train on which he 

life 

was supposed to be returning from the Crimea was wrecked, 
just as it reached Moscow, by a mine placed between the rails. 
Alexander escaped only because he had reached the capital secretly 
on an earlier train. The next attempt (February, 1880) was to kill 
him while at dinner in the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg. Dyna- 
mite was exploded, ten soldiers were killed and fifty-three wounded 
in the guard-room directly overhead, and the floor of the dining 
room was torn up. The Czar narrowly escaped because he did not 
go to dinner at the usual hour. 

St. Petersburg was by this time thoroughly terrorized. Alexander 
now appointed Loris Melikoff practically dictator. Melikoff sought 
to inaugurate a milder regime. He released hundreds of prisoners, 
. „ and in many cases commuted the death sentence. He urged 

Alexander II -^ '^ 

and Loris the Czar to grant the people some share in the government, 

Melikoff believing that this would kill the Nihilist movement, which 

was a violent expression of the discontent of the nation with the 



ABSOLUTISM OF ALEXANDER III 637 

abuses of an arbitrary and lawless system of government. He 
urged that this could be done without weakening the principle of 
autocracy, and that thus Alexander would win back the popularity 
he had enjoyed during his early reforming years. After much hesi- 
tation and mental perturbation the Czar ordered, March 13, 1881, 
Melikoff 's scheme to be published in the official journal. But . . ,. 

'■ •' Assassination 

on that same afternoon, as he was returning from a drive, of Alexander 
escorted by Cossacks, a bomb was thrown at his carriage. 
The carriage was wrecked, and many of his escorts were injured. 
Alexander escaped as by a miracle, but a second bomb exploded near 
him as he was going tp aid the injured. He was horribly mangled, 
and died within an hour. Thus perished the Czar Liberator. At 
the same time the hopes of the Liberals perished also. This act of 
supreme violence did not intimidate the successor to the throne, 
Alexander III, whose entire reign was one of stern repression. 

THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER III 

The man who now ascended the throne of Russia was in the full 
flush of magnificent manhood. Alexander III, son of Alexander II, 
was thirty-six years of age, and of powerful physique. His .. ^ 
education had been chiefly military. He was a man of firm m 
and resolute rather than large or active mind. (1881-1894) 

It shortly became clear that he possessed a strong, inflexible 
character, that he was a thorough believer in' absolutism, and was 
determined to maintain it undiminished. He assumed an 
attitude of defiant hostility to innovators and liberals. His Rigorous 

policy of 

reign, which lasted from 1881 to 1894, was one of reversion to reaction 
the older ideals of government and of unqualified absolutism. 

The terrorists were hunted down, and their attempts practically 
ceased. The press was thoroughly gagged, university professors 
and students were watched, suspended, exiled, as the case ^^^ 
might be. The reforms of Alexander II were in part undone, terrorists 
and the secret police, the terrible Third Section, was greatly ^^^^^^ 
augmented. Liberals gave up all hope of any improvement during 
this reign, and waited for better days. Under Alexander III began 
the inhuman persecutions of the Jews which have been so dark a 
feature of recent Russian history. The great Jewish emigration 
to the United States dates from this time. 



638 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

In one sphere only was there any progress in this bleak, stem reign. 

That sphere was the economic. An industrial revolution began then 

which was carried much farther under his successor. Russia 

had been for centuries an agricultural country whose agriculture, 

moreover, was of the primitive type. W^hatever industries existed 

were mainly of the household kind. Russia was one of the poorest 

countries in the world, her immense resources being undeveloped. 

Under the system of protection adopted by Alexander II, and 

continued and increased by Alexander III, industries of a modern 

kind began to grow up. A tremendous impetus was given to this 

development by the appointment in .1892 as Minister of 

witte, Finance and Commerce of Sergius de Witte. Witte believed 

Minister of ^}^^|- Russia, the largest and most populous country in Europe, 

a world in itself, ought to be self-sufficient, that as long as it 

remained chiefl}^ agricultural it would be tributary to the industrial 

nations for manufactured articles, that it had abundant resources, 

in raw material and in labor, to enable it to supply its own needs 

Witte's i^ ^hey were but developed. He believed that this develop- 

industriai ment could be brought about by the adoption of a policy of 

Dolicv 

protection. Was not the astonishing industrial growth of 
Germany and of the United States convincing proof of the value 
of such a policy? By adopting it for Russia, by encouraging for- 
eigners to invest heavily in the new protected industries, by showing 
them that their rewards would inevitably be large, he began and 
carried far the economic transformation of his country. Immense 
amounts of foreign capital poured in and Russia advanced in- 
dustrially in the closing decade of the nineteenth century with 
great swiftness. 

One thing more was necessary. Russia's greatest lack was good 

means of communication. She now undertook to supply this want 

Extensive ^^ extensive railway building. For some years before Witte 

raUway _ assumed office, Russia was building less than 400 miles of 

construction railway a year ; from that time on for the rest of the decade, 

she built nearly 1400 miles a year. The most stupendous of these 

undertakings was that of a trunk line connecting Europe with the 

Pacific Ocean, the great Trans-Siberian railroad. For this Russia 

borrowed vast sums of money in western Europe, principally in 

France. Begun in 1891, the road was formally opened in 1902. It 

has reduced the time and cost of transportation to the East about 



ACCESSION OF NICHOLAS II 639 

one-half. In 1909 Russia possessed over 41,000 miles of railway, over 
28,000 of which were owned and operated by the Government. 

This tremendous change in the economic life of the Empire was 
destined to have momentous consequences, some of which were 
quickly apparent. Cities grew rapidly, a large laboring class Rise of labor 
developed, and labor problems of the kind familiar to western problems 
countries, socialistic theories, spread among the working people ; 
also a new middle class of capitalists and manufacturers was created 
which might some day demand a share in the government. These 
new forces would, in time, threaten the old, illiberal, unprogressive 
regime which had so long kept Russia stagnant and profoundly un- 
happy. That the old system was being undermined was not, however, 
apparent, and might not have been for many years had not Russia, 
ten years after Alexander's death, become involved in a disastrous 
and humiliating war with Japan. 

THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II 

Alexander III died in 1894, ^I'^d was succeeded by his son, Nicholas 
II, then twenty-six years of age. The hope was general that a 
milder regime might now be introduced. This, however, was not 
to be. For ten years the young Czar pursued the policy of Accession of 
his father with scarcely a variation save in the direction of Nicholas 11 
greater severity. A suggestion that representative institutions 
might be granted was declared "a senseless dream." The govern- 
ment was not one of law but of arbitrary power. Its instruments 
were a numerous and corrupt body of state officials and a ruthless, 
active police. No one was secure against arrest, imprisonment, 
exile. The most elementary personal rights were lacking. 

The professional and educated man was in an intolerable position. 
If a professor in a university, he was watched by the police, and was 
likely to be removed at any moment as was Professor Milyoukov, 
a historian of distinguished attainments, for no other reason „ 

" Persecution 

than "generally noxious tendencies." If an editor, his po- of the " in - 
sition was even more precarious, unless he was utterly servile *®"^*^*"^'^ 
to the authorities. It was a suffocating atmosphere for any man of 
the slightest intellectual independence, living in the ideas of the 
present age. The censorship grew more and more rigorous, and 
included such books as Green's Short History of the English People, 



640 



RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN 



and Bryce's American Commonwealth. Arbitrary arrests of all 
kinds increased from year to" year as the difficulty of thoroughly 
bottling up Russia increased. Students were the objects of special 
police care, as it was the young and ardent and educated who 
were most indignant at this senseless despotism. Many of them 
disappeared, in one year as many as a fifth of those in the University 
of Moscow, probably sent to Siberia or to prisons in Europe. 

A government of this kind was not likely to err from excess of sym- 
pathy with the subject nationalities, such as the Poles and the Finns. 

Attack upon In Finland, indeed, its 

the Finns arbitrary course at- 
tained its climax. Finland 
had been acquired by Russia 
in 1809, but on liberal terms. 
It was not incorporated in 
Russia, but continued a Grand 
Duchy, with the Emperor of 
Russia as simply Grand Duke. 
It had its own Parliament, its 
Fundamental Laws or consti- 
tution, to which the Grand 
Duke swore fidelity. These 
Fundamental Laws could not 
be altered or interpreted or 
repealed except with the con- 
sent of the Diet and the Grand 
Duke. Finland was a con- 
stitutional state, governing it- 
self, connected with Russia in the person of its sovereign. It had 
its own army, its own currency and postal system. Under this 
liberal regime it prospered greatly, its population increasing from 
less than a million to nearly three millions by the close of the century, 
and was, according to an historian of Russia, at least thirty years 
in advance of that country in all the appliances of material civiliza- 
tion. The sight of this country enjoying a constitution of its own 
and a separate organization was an ofifense to the men controlling 
Russia. They wished to sweep away all distinctions between the 
various parts of the Emperor's dominions, to unify, to Russify. 
The attack upon the liberties of the Finns began under Alexander III. 




Nicholas II 



RELATIONS WITH THE ORIENT 641 

It was carried much farther by Nicholas II, who, on February 
15. 1899, issued an imperial manifestd which really abrogated 
the constitution of that country. The Finns began a stub- of the* '°° 
born but apparently hopeless struggle for their historic rights Finnish con- 

. , , r , , , , r ■^^■ StltUtlOn 

With the autocrat of one hundred and forty million men. 

Under such a system as that just described men could be terrorized 
into silence ; they could not be made contented. Disaffection of all 
classes, driven into subterranean channels, only increased, awaiting 
the time for explosion. That time came with the disastrous defeat of 
Russia in the war with Japan in 1904-1905, a landmark in contempo- 
rary history. 

To understand recent events in Russia it is necessary to trace the 
course of that war whose consequences have been profound, and to 
show the significance of that conflict we must interrupt this „. , , 

^ '^ Rise of the 

narrative of Russian history in order to give an account of Far Eastern 
the recent evolution of Asia, the rise of the so-called Far *^"^^''°° 
Eastern Question, and the interaction of Occident and Orient upon 
each other. 

REFERENCES 

Russia in 1815 : Skrine, Expansion of Russia, pp. 8-13; Cambridge Modern 
History, Vol. X, Chap. XIII, pp. 413-439. 

Reign of Alexander I : Skrine, pp. 15-85. 

Reign of Nicholas I : Skrine, pp. 86-164. 

Alexander II and the Emancipation of the Serfs : Skrine, pp. 1 78-191 ; 
Wallace, Russia, Chaps. XXVII-XXXIII ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, 
pp. 613-627. 

Alexant)er II and Nihilism: Rose, Development of the European Nations, 
Vol. I, pp. 344-366; Skrine, pp. 214-222, 265-270; Wallace, Chap. XXXIV; 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 628-630. 

Reign of Alexander III : Skrine, pp. 271-308; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. XII, pp. 312-321. 

Reign of Nicholas II : Skrine, pp. 309-348 ; Wallace, Chaps. XXXVI- 
XXXIX. 

Poland Since 1862 : Phillips, Poland (Home University Library), pp. 125- 
250; Orvis, A Brief History of Poland, Chaps. VIII-X. 



CHAPTER XXXIII 
THE FAR EAST 

ENGLAND, FRANCE, AND RUSSIA IN ASIA 

Europe has not only taken possession of Africa, but she has taken 

possession of large parts of Asia, and presses with increasing force 

upon the remainder. England and France dominate southern 

France, and Asia by their control, the former of India and Burma, the 

Russia in latter of a large part of Indo-China. Russia, on the other 

hand, dominates the north, from the Ural Mountains to 

the Pacific Ocean. As far as geographical extent is concerned, she is 

far more an Asiatic power than a European, which, indeed, is also tl"ue 

of England and of France, and she has been an Asiatic power much 

longer than they, for she began her expansion into Asia before the 

Pilgrims came to America. For nearly three centuries Russia has 

been a great Asiatic state, while England has been a power in India 

for only half that time. 

It was not until the nineteenth century, however, that Russia 

began to devote serious attention to Asia as a field for colonial and 

Russian Commercial expansion. Siberia was regarded merely as a con- 

expansion vcnient prison to which to send her disaffected or criminal 

citizens. Events in Europe have caused her to concentrate her 

attention more and more upon her Asiatic development. She has 

sought there what she had long been seeking in Europe, but without 

avail, because of the opposition she encountered, namely, contact 

, with the ocean, free outlet to the world. Russia's coast line, 

Russia seeks 

access to the either in Europe or Asia, had no harbors free from ice the year 
^^^ round. Blocked decisively and repeatedly from obtaining such 

in Europe at the expense of Turkey, she has sought them in Eastern 
Asia. This ambition explains her Asiatic policies. In 1858 she 
acquired from China the whole northern bank of the Amur and two 
years later more territory farther south, the Maritime Province, at 

642 



CONDITIONS IN CHINA 643 

the southern point of which she founded as a naval base Vladivostok, 
which means the Dominator of the East. But Vladivostok was not 
ice-free in winter. Russia still lacked her longed-for outlet. 



CHINA 

Between Russian Asia on the north, and British and French Asia 
on the south, lies the oldest nation of the world, China, and one more 
extensive than Europe and probably more populous, with The civUiza- 
more than 400,000,000 inhabitants. It is a land of great tion of China 
navigable rivers, of vast agricultural areas, and of mines rich in coal 
and metals, as yet largely undeveloped. The Chinese were a highly 
civilized people long before the Europeans were. They preceded the 
latter by centuries in the use of the compass, powder, porcelain, 
paper. As early as the sixth century of our era they knew the art 
of printing from movable blocks. They have long been famous 
for their work in bronze, in wood, in lacquer, for the marvels of their 
silk manufacture. As a people laborious and intelligent, they have 
always been devoted to the peaceful pursuits of industry, and have 
despised the arts of war. 

China had always lived a life of isolation, despising the outside 
world. She had no diplomatic representatives in any foreign coun- 
try, nor were any foreign ambassadors resident in Peking, xhe isoia- 
Foreigners were permitted to trade in only one Chinese port, *'°'* °^ China 
Canton, and even there only under vexati6us and humiliating 
conditions. 

It was not likely that a policy of such isolation could be perma- 
nently maintained in the modern age, and as the nineteenth century 
progressed it was gradually shattered. The Chinese desired nothing 
better than to be let alone. But this was not to be. By a long 
series of aggressions extending to our own day various European 
powers have forced China to enter into relations with them, to make 
concessions of territory, of trading privileges, of diplomatic inter- 
course. In this story of European aggression the Opium War The Opium 
waged by Great Britain against China from 1840 to 1842 W" 
was decisive, as showing how easy it was to conquer China. The 
Chinese had forbidden the importation of opium, as injurious to 
their people. But the British did not wish to give up a trade in 
which the profits were enormous. The war, the first between China 



644 THE FAR EAST 

and a European power, lasted two years and ended in the victory of 
Great Britain. The consequences, in forcing the doors of China 
open to European influence, were important. By the Treaty of 
The treaty Nanking, 1 842, she was forced to pay a large indemnity, to 
ports open to British trade four ports in addition to Canton, and to 

cede the island of Hong Kong, near Canton, to England outright. 
Hong Kong has since become one of the most important naval 
and commercial stations of the British Empire. 

Other powers now proceeded to take advantage of the British 
success. The United States sent Caleb Cushing to make a com- 
mercial treaty with China in 1844, and before long France, Belgium, 
Holland, Prussia, and Portugal established trade centers at the five 
treaty ports. The number of such ports has since been increased 
to over forty. China was obliged to abandon her policy of isolation 
and to send and receive ambassadors. 

A period of critical importance in China's relations with Europe 
began in the last decade of the nineteenth century as a result of a war 
with Japan in 1 894-1 895. To appreciate this war it is necessary to 
give some account of the previous evolution of Japan. 

JAPAN 

The rise of Japan as the most forceful state in the Orient is a 
chapter of very recent history, of absorbing interest, and of great 
significance to the present age. Accomplished in the last third of the 
nineteenth century, it has already profoundly altered the conditions 
of international politics, and seems likely to be a factor of increasing 
moment in the future evolution of the world. 

Japan is an archipelago consisting of several large islands and about 
four thousand smaller ones. It covered, in 1894, an area of 147,000 
Description square miles, an area smaller than that of California. The 
of Japan main islands form a crescent, the northern point being op- 

posite Siberia, the southern turning in toward Korea. Between it 
and Asia is the Sea of Japan. The country is very mountainous, its 
. most famous peak, Fujiyama, rising to a height of 12,000 feet. Of 
volcanic origin, numerous craters are still active. Earthquakes are 
not uncommon, and have determined the character of domestic 
architecture. The coast line is much indented, and there are many 
good harbors. The Japanese call their country Nippon, or the Land 



EMERGENCE OF JAPAN 645 

of the Rising Sun. Only about one-sixth of the land is under culti- 
vation, owing to its mountainous character, and owing to the prev- 
alent mode of farming. Yet into this small area is crowded a 
population of about fifty millions, which is larger than that of Great 
Britain or France. It is no occasion for surprise that the Japanese 
have desired territorial expansion. 

The people of Japan derived the beginnings of their civilization 
from China, but in many respects they differed greatly from the 
Chinese. The virtues of the soldier were held in high esteem. Japanese 
Patriotism was a passion, and with it went the spirit of unques- "vUization 
tioning self-sacrifice. "Thou shalt honor the gods and love thy 
country," was a command of the Shinto religion, and was universally 
obeyed. An art-loving and pleasure-loving people, they possessed 
active minds and a surprising power of assimilation which they were 
to show on a national and momentous scale. 

The Japanese had followed the same policy of seclusion as had the 
Chinese. Japan had for centuries been almost hermetically sealed 
against the outside world. On the peninsula of Deshima , 

° ^ Japanese 

there was a single trading station which carried on a slight policy 
commerce with the Dutch. This was Japan's sole point of ** isoation, 
contact with the outside world for over two centuries. 

This unnatural seclusion was rudely disturbed by the arrival in 
Japanese waters of an American fleet under Commodore Perry in 
1853, sent out by the Government of the United States, commodore 
American sailors, engaged in the whale fisheries in the Pacific, Perry 
v/ere now and then wrecked on the coasts of Japan, where they 
generally received cruel treatment. Perry was instructed to demand 
of the ruler of Japan protection for American sailors and property 
thus wrecked, and permission for American ships to put into one or 
more Japanese ports, in order to obtain necessary supplies and to 
dispose of their cargoes. He presented these demands to the Gov- 
ernment. He announced further that if his requests were refused, 
he would open hostilities. The Government granted certain imme- 
diate demands, but insisted that the general question of opening 
relations with a foreign state required careful consideration. Perry 
consented to allow this discussion and sailed away, stating that he 
would return the following year for the final answer. The discussion 
of the general question on the part of the governing classes was very 
earnest. Some believed in maintaining the old policy of complete 



646 THE FAR EAST 

exclusion of foreigners. Others, however, beUeved this impossible, 

owing to the manifest military superiority of the foreigners. They 

Folic of thought it well to enter into relations with them in order to 

isolation learn the secret of that superiority, and then to appropriate 

own -^ £^^ Japan. They believed this the only way to insure, 

in the long run, the independence and power of their country. This 

opinion finally prevailed, and when Perry reappeared a treaty was 

made with him (1854) by which two ports were opened to American 

ships. This was a mere beginning, but the important fact was 

that Japan had, after two centuries of seclusion, entered into relations 

with a foreign state. Later other and more liberal treaties were 

concluded with the United States and with other countries. 

The reaction of these events upon the internal evolution of Japan 
was remarkable. They produced a very critical situation, and precip- 
itated a civil war, the outcome of which discussion and conflict was 
the triumph of the party that believed in change. After 1868 Japan 
R 'd revolutionized her political and social institutions in a few years, 

formation of adopted with ardor the material and scientific civilization of 
Japan ^^^ West, made herself in these respects a European state, 

and entered as a result upon an international career, which has 
already profoundl}^ modified the world, and is likely to be a constant 
and an increasing factor in the future development of the East. So 
complete, so rapid, so hearty an appropriation of an alien civilization, 
a civilization against which every precaution of exclusion had for 
centuries been taken, is a change unique in the history of the world, 
and notable for the audacity and the intelligence displayed. The 
entrance upon this course was a direct result of Perry's expedition. 
The Japanese revolution will always remain an astounding story. 
Once begun it proceeded with great rapidity. In place of the former 
military class arose an army based on European models. Military 
service was declared universal and obligatory in 1872. The German 
system, which has revolutionized Europe, began to revolutionize 
Asia. 

The first railroad was begun in 1 870 between Tokio and Yokohama. 

Thirty years later there were over 3,600 miles in operation. To-day 

there are 6,000. The educational methods of the West were also intro- 

Reform in duced. A University was established at Tokio, and later 

education another at Kioto. Professors from abroad were induced to 

accept important positions in them. Students showed great enthusi- 



WAR BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN 647 

asm in pursuing the new learning. Public schools were created 
rapidly, and by 1883 about 3,300,000 pupils were receiving education. 
In 1873 the European calendar was adopted. The codes of law were 
thoroughly remodeled after an exhaustive study of European systems. 
Finally a constitution was granted in 1889, after eight years 
of careful elaboration and study of foreign models. It coraTe" a^con- 
established a parliament of two chambers, a House of Peers stitutionai 

st3.te 

(the so-called "Elder Statesmen") and a House of Represent- 
atives. The vote was given to men of twenty-five years or older 
who paid a certain property tax. The constitution reserved very 
large powers for the monarch. Parliament met for the first time in 
1890. The test of reformed Japan came in the last decade of the 
nineteenth century and the first of the twentieth, and proved the 
solidity of this amazing achievement. During those years she 
fought and defeated two powers apparently much stronger than 
herself, China and Russia, and took her place as an equal in the 
family of nations. 



CHINO-JAPANESE WAR AND ITS CONSEQUENCES 

A war in which the efficiency of the transformed Japan was clearly 
established broke out with China in 1894. The immediate cause 
was the relations of the two powers to Korea. Korea was a ^ 

Cause of the 

kingdom, but both China and Japan claimed suzerainty over war with 
it. Japan had an interest in extending her "claims, as she ^^"^^ 
desired larger markets for her products. Friction was frequent 
between the two countries concerning their rights in Korea, as a 
consequence of which Japan began a war in which, with her modern 
army, she was easily victorious over her giant neighbor, whose 
armies fought in the old Asiatic style with a traditional Asiatic 
equipment. The Japanese drove the Chinese out of Korea, in- 
vaded Manchuria, where they seized the fortress of Port Arthur, 
the strongest position in eastern Asia, occupied the Liao-tung penin- 
sula on which that fortress is located, and prepared to advance Treaty of 
toward Peking. The Chinese, alarmed for their capital, Shimonoseki 
agreed to make peace, and signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki (April 
17, 1895), by which they ceded Port Arthur, the Liao-tung peninsula, 
the Island of Formosa, and the Pescadores Islands to Japan, also 
agreeing to pay a large war indemnity of two hundred million taels 



648 THE FAR EAST 

(about $175,000,000). China recognized the complete independence 
of Korea. 

But in the hour of her triumph Japan was thwarted by a European 

intervention, and deprived of the fruits of her victory. Russia now 

entered in decisive fashion upon a scene where she was to play 

Intervention , , 01 1 1 

of Russia, a promment part for the next ten years. She soon showed 
France, and ^j^g^^ gj^g entertained plans directly opposed to those of the 

Germany ^ . r-r- 

Japanese. She induced France and Germany to join her in 

forcing them to give up the most important rewards of their victory, 

in ordering them to surrender the Liao-tung peninsula on the ground 

that the possession of Port Arthur threatened the independence 

of Peking and would be a perpetual menace "to the peace of the Far 

East." This was a bitter blow to the Japanese. Recognizing, how- 

Ta an ever, that it would be folly to oppose the three great military 

relinquishes powers of Europe, they yielded, restored Port Arthur and the 

peninsula to China, and withdrew from the mainland, indignant 

at the action of the powers, and resolved to increase their army and 

navy and develop their resources, believing that their enemy in Asia 

was Russia, with whom a day of reckoning must come sooner or later, 

and confirmed in this belief by events that crowded thick and fast 

in the next few years. 

The insincerity of the powers in talking about the integrity of China 
and the peace of the East was not long in manifesting itself. 

In 1897 two German missionaries were murdered in the province of 
Shantung. The German Emperor immediately sent a fleet to 
German demand redress. As a result Germany secured (March 5, 1898) 

aggression from China a ninety-nine year lease of the fine harbor of 
Kiauchau, with a considerable area round about, and extensive com- 
mercial and financial privileges in the whole province of Shantung. 
Indeed, that province became a German "sphere of influence." 

The action encouraged Russia to make further demands. She 

acquired from China (March 27, 1898) a lease for twenty-five years 

„ . of Port Arthur, the strongest position in eastern Asia, which, 

Russia se- 'or- i > 

cures Port as she had stated to Japan in 1895, enabled the possessor to 
^^^^'^ threaten Peking and to disturb the peace of the Orient. France 

and England also each acquired a port on similar terms of lease. 

The powers also forced China to open a dozen new ports to the trade 

of the world, and to grant extensive rights to establish factories and 

build railways and develop mines. 



RUSSIA AND MANCHURIA 649 

It seemed, in the summer of 1898, that China was about to undergo 
the fate of Africa, that it was to be carved up among the various 
powers. This tendency was checlced by the rise of a bitterly anti- 
foreign party, occasioned by these acts of aggression, and culminating 
in the Boxer insurrections of 1900. These grew rapidly, and spread 
over northern China. Their aim was to drive the "foreign _. 

^ The 

devils into the sea." Scores of missionaries and their families "Boxer " 
were killed, and hundreds of Chinese converts murdered in cold ™°^^™^° 
blood. Finally, the Legations of the various powers in Peking were 
besieged, and for weeks Europe and America feared that all the 
foreigners there would be massacred. In the presence of this com- 
mon danger the powers were obliged to drop their jealousies and 
rivalries, and send a relief expedition, consisting of troops from 
Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Great Britain, and the United 
States. The Legations were rescued, just as their resources Rgg^^g 
were exhausted by the siege of two months (June 13-August of the 
14, 1900). The international army suppressed the Boxer ^sa ions 
movement after a short campaign, forced the Chinese to pay a large 
indemnity, and to punish the ringleaders. In forming this inter- 
national army, the powers had agreed not to acquire territory, and 
at the close of the war they guaranteed the integrity of China. . 
Whether this would mean anything remained to be seen. 

The integrity of China had been invoked in 1895 and ignored in the 
years following. Russia, France, and Germany had appealed to it as 
a reason for demanding the evacuation of Port Arthur by 
the Japanese in 1895. Soon afterward Germany had virtually indignant 
annexed a port and a province of China, and France had also ^^^ appre- 

. hensive 

acquired a port in the south. Then came the most decisive 
act, the securing of Port Arthur by Russia. This caused a wave 
of indignation to sweep over Japan, and the people of that country 
were with difficulty kept in check by the prudence of their statesmen. 
The acquisition of Port Arthur by Russia meant that now she had a 
harbor ice-free the year round. That Russia did not look upon her 
possession as merely a short lease, but as a permanent one, was j^^ggj^^ 
unmistakably shown by her conduct. She constructed a activity in 
railroad south from Harbin, connecting with the Trans- ^""^ ""* 
Siberian. She threw thousands of troops into Manchuria ; she set 
about immensely strengthening Port Arthur as a fortress, and a 
considerable fleet was stationed there. To the Japanese all this 



650 THE FAR EAST 

seemed to prove that she purposed ultimately to annex the immense 
province of Manchuria, and later probably Korea, which would give 
her a larger number of ice-free harbors and place her in a dominant 
position on the Pacific, menacing, the Japanese felt, the very existence 
of Japan. Moreover, this would absolutely cut off all chance of 
possible Japanese expansion in these directions, and of the acquisition 
of their markets for Japanese industries. The ambitions of the two 
powers to dominate the East clashed, and, in addition, to Japan the 
matter seemed to involve her permanent safety, even in her island 
empire. 

RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR AND ITS CONSEQUENCES 

Japan's prestige at this time was greatly increased by a treaty con- 
cluded with England in 1902 establishing a defensive alliance, each 
power promising the other aid in certain contingencies. In 
Japanese casc either should become involved in war the other would 

Treaty of remain neutral but would abandon its neutrality and come 
1902 . . -^ . . 

to the assistance of its ally if another power should join the 

enemy. This meant that if France or Germany should aid Russia 

in a war with Japan, then England would aid Japan, In a war 

between Russia and Japan alone England would be neutral. The 

tre'aty was therefore of great practical importance to Japan, and it 

also increased her prestige. For the first time in history, an Asiatic 

power had entered into an alliance with a European power on a plane 

of entire equality. Japan had entered the family of nations and it 

was remarkable evidence of her importance that Great Britain 

saw advantage in an alliance with her. Meanwhile Russia had a 

large army in Manchuria and a leasehold of the strong fortress and 

naval base of Port Arthur. She had definitely promised to with- 

Ta an makes ^^^^ from Manchuria when order should be restored, but she 

war upon declined to make the statement more explicit. Her military 

"^^** preparations increasing all the while, the Japanese demanded 

of her the date at which she intended to withdraw her troops from 

Manchuria, order having apparently been restored. Negotiations 

between the two powers dragged on from August, 1903, to February, 

1904. Japan, believing that Russia was merely trying to gain time 

to tighten her grip on Manchuria by elaborate and intentional delay 

and evasion, and to prolong the discussion until she had sufficient 

troops in the province to be able to throw aside the mask, suddenly 



THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR 651 

broke off diplomatic relations and commenced hostilities. On the 
night of the Sth-gth of February, 1904, the Japanese torpedoed a 
part of the Russian fleet before Port Arthur and threw their armies 
into Korea. 

The Russo-Japanese War, thus begun, lasted from February, 1904, 
to September, 1905. It was fought on both land and sea. Russia 
had two fleets in Asiatic waters, one at Port Arthur and one at Ruggo-jap- 
Vladivostok. Her land connection with eastern Asia was by anese War, 
the long single track of the Trans-Siberian railway. Japan ^^^^-ipos 
succeeded in bottling the Port Arthur fleet at the very outset of the 
war. Controlling the Asiatic waters she was able to transport 
armies and munitions to the scene of the land warfare with only 
slight losses at the hands of the Vladivostok fleet. One army drove 
the Russians out of Korea, back from the Yalu. Another under 
General Oku landed on the Liao-tung peninsula and cut off connections 
of Port Arthur with Russia. It attempted to take Port Arthur by 
assault, but was unable to carry it, and finally began a siege. This 
siege was conducted by General Nogi, General Oku being 
engaged in driving the Russians back upon Mukden. The pof^ Arthur 
Russian General Kuropatkin marched south from Mukden 
to relieve Port Arthur. South of Mukden great battles occurred, 
that of Liao-yang, engaging probably half a million men and lasting 
several days, resulting in a victory of the Japanese, who entered 
Liao-yang September 4, 1904. Their objective now was Mukden, 
Meanwhile, in August, the Japanese had defeated disastrously both 
the Port Arthur and Vladivostok fleets, eliminating them from the 
war. The terrific bombardment of Port Arthur continued until that 
fortress surrendered after a siege of ten months, costing the Japanese 
60,000 in killed and wounded (January i, 1905). The army which 
had conducted this siege was now able to march northward to 
cooperate with General Oku around Mukden. There several battles 
were fought, the greatest since the Franco-German war of 1870, 
lasting in each case several days. The last, at Mukden „ , ^ 

. Mukden 

(March 6-10, 1905), cost both armies 120,000 men killed and captured by 
wounded in four days' fighting. The Russians were defeated *^^^ Japanese 
and evacuated Mukden, leaving 40,000 prisoners in the hands of the 
Japanese. 

Another incident of the war was the sending out from Russia of a 
new fleet under Admiral Rodjestvensky, which, after a long voyage 



652 THE FAR EAST 

round the Cape of Good Hope, was attacked by Admiral Togo as 
Destruction it entered the Sea of Japan and annihilated in the great naval 
^f the battle of the Straits of Tsushima, May 27, 1905. 

fleet. May The two powers finally consented, at the suggestion of Presi- 

27. 1905 ^gj^j Roosevelt, to send delegates to Portsmouth, New Hamp- 

shire, to see if the war could be brought to a close. The result was 
the signing of the Treaty of Portsmouth, September 5, 1905. The 
war between Japan and Russia had been fought in lands belonging 
to neither power, in Korea, and principally in Manchuria, a province 
of China, yet Korea and China took no part in the war, were passive 
spectators, powerless to preserve the neutrality of their soil or their 
independent sovereignty. The war had cost each nation about a 
billion dollars and about 200,000 in killed and wounded. 

By the Treaty of Portsmouth Russia recognized Japan's paramount 

interests in Korea, which country, however, was to remain independ- 

The Treaty ^^^' Both the Russians and the Japanese were to evacuate 

of Ports- Manchuria. Russia transferred to Japan her lease of Port 

Arthur and the Liao-tung peninsula, and ceded the southern 

half of the island of Saghalin. 

Japan thus stood forth the dominant power of the Orient. She had 
expanded in ten years by the annexation of Formosa and Saghalin. 
Japan's rapid She has not regarded Korea as independent, but since the close 
expansion Qf ^]^g ^^j- j^^g annexed her (1910). She possesses Port Arthur, 
and her position in Manchuria is one which has given rise to much 
diplomatic discussion. She has an army of 600,000 men, equipped 
with all the most modern appliances of destruction, a navy about 
the size of that of France, flourishing industries, and flourishing com- 
merce. The drain upon her resources during the period just passed 
had been tremendous, and, appreciating the need of many years of 
quiet recuperation and upbuilding, she was willing to make the 
Peace of Portsmouth. Her financial difficulties are great, imposing 
an abnormally heav}^ taxation. No people has accomplished so vast 
a transformation in so short a time. 

The lesson of these tremendous events was not lost upon the 

Chinese. The victories of Japan, an Oriental state, over a great 

The effect of Occidental power, as well as over China, convinced many in- 

these events flucntial Chinese of the ad.vantage to be derived from an adop- 

upon ina ^j^^ ^^ European methods, an appropriation of European 

knowledge. Moreover, they saw that the only way to repel the 



^o^^v'^M^"" &rsaaun-n« 



ASIA 

IN 1914 



Miles 

HaiJroads 



I I Russian I I English 
I — \ French l — \Foriugues& 
\ZZ\nulch U3 Spanish 
I 1 6erman UIMnitedStales 
I \JafMift 




RADICAL CHANGES IN CHINA 653 

aggressions of outside powers was to be equipped with the weapons 
used by the aggressor. 

The leaven of reform began to work fruitfully in the Middle King- 
dom. A military spirit arose in this state, which formerly despised 
the martial virtues. Under the direction of Japanese instructors a 
beginning was made in the construction of a Chinese army Reform in 
after European models and equipped in European fashion, c^^^b. 
The acquisition of western knowledge was encouraged. Students 
went in large numbers to the schools and universities of Europe and 
America. Twenty thousand of them went to Japan. The state 
encouraged the process by throwing open the civil service, that is, 
official careers, to those who obtained honors in examinations in 
western subjects. Schools were opened throughout the country. 
Even public schools for girls were established in some places, a 
remarkable fact for any Oriental country. In 1906 an edict was 
issued aiming at the prohibition of the use of opium within ten years. 
This edict has since been put into execution and the opium trade has 
finally been suppressed. 

Political reorganization was also undertaken. An imperial com- 
mission was sent to Europe in 1905 to study the representative 
systems of various countries, and on its return a committee, a constitu- 
consisting of many high dignitaries, was appointed to study its *^*'° promised 
report. In August, 1908, an official edict was issued promising, in the 
name of the Emperor, a constitution in 1917. 

But the process of transformation was destihed to proceed more 
rapidly than was contemplated. Radical and revolutionary parties 
appeared upon the scene, demanding a constitution immediately. 
As the Imperial Government could not resist, it granted one in 191 1 
establishing a parliament with extensive powers. To cap all, in 
central and southern China a republican movement arose and „, . 

China pro- 

spread rapidly. Finally a republic was proclaimed at Nanking claimed a 
and Dr. Sun Yat Sen, who had been educated in part in the ^^p"^''*= 
United States, was elected president. A clash between this republi- 
can movement and the imperial party in the north resulted in the 
forced abdication of the boy Emperor (February, 191 2). This was 
the end of the Manchu dynasty. Thereupon Yuan Shih K'ai was 
chosen President of the Republic of China. The situation confront- 
ing the new Republic was extremely grave. Would it prove possible 
to establish the new regime upon solid and enduring bases, or would 



654 THE FAR EAST 

the Republic fall a prey to the internal dissensions of the Chinese, 
or to foreign aggression at the hands of European powers, or, more 
likely, at the hands of an ambitious and militaristic neighbor, Japan ? 
These were the secrets of the future. 

Yuan Shih K'ai was elected for a term of five years. His admin- 
istration was marked by a growing tension between his increasingly 
autocratic tendencies and the liberal and radical tendencies of 
Parliament. In the midst of his term, the President died, June 6, 
1916. He was succeeded by Li Yuan-Lung, the Vice-President, 
generally considered more loyal to republican principles. 

REFERENCES 

Early Relations of Europe with China : Douglas, Europe and the Far 
East, pp. 41-90. 

The Opening or Japan: Douglas, pp. 144-168. 

The Revolution in Japan: Douglas, pp. 169-209; Cambridge Modern 
History, Vol. XII, Chap. XVIII, pp. 537-575. 

The Boxer Movement : Douglas, pp. 323-360 ; Cambridge Modern History, 
Vol. XII, pp. 517-521. 

Causes of the Russo-Japanese War: Douglas, pp. 409-424; Asakawa, 
Russo-J apanese Conflict, pp. 1-64. 

The Russo-Japanese War : Cavihridge Modern History, Vol. XII, Chap. 
XIX, pp. 576-601. 

The Treaty of Portsmouth : Hershey, The International Law and Diplomacy 
of the Russo-Japanese War, Chap. XIII. 

Conditions in China and Japan : Hornbeck, S. K., Contemporary Politics 
in the Far East (1916) ; T. E. Millard, Democracy atid the Eastern Qiicstio)i. 



CHAPTER XXXIV 
RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

We are now in a position to follow with some understanding the 
very recent history of Russia, a history at once crowded, intricate, 
and turbulent. That history is the record of the reaction of the 
Japanese War upon Russia herself. 

That war was from the beginning unpopular with the Russians. 
Consisting of a series of defeats, its unpopularity only increased, and 
the indignation and wrath of the people were shown during its 
course in many ways. The Government was justly held ity^n^Rus'^sia 
responsible, and was discredited by its failure. As it added °^ ^^^ ^^"^ 

1 1 I 1 1- 1 11- 1 • , ^ith Japan 

greatly to the already existmg discontent, the plight in which 
the Government found itself rendered it powerless to repress the 
popular expression of that discontent in the usual summary fashion. 
There was for many months extraordinary freedom of discussion, 
of the press, of speech, cut short now and then by the officials, only 
to break out later. The war with Japan had for the Government 
most unexpected and unwelcome consequences. The very winds 
were let loose. 

The Minister of the Interior, in whose hands lay the maintenance 
of public order, was at this time Plehve, one of the most bitterly 
hated men in recent Russian history. Plehve had been in piehve's 
power since 1902, and had revealed a character of unusual "°° regime 
harshness. He had incessantly and pitilessly prosecuted liberals 
everywhere, had filled the prisons with his victims, had been the 
center of the movement against the Finns, previously described, and 
seems to have secretly favored the horrible massacres of Jews which 
occurred at this time. He was detested as few men have been. 
He attempted to suppress in the usual manner the rising volume of 
criticism occasioned by the war, by applying the same ruthless 
methods of breaking up meetings, and exiling to Siberia Assassination 
students, professional men, laborers. He was killed July, °^ Plehve 
1904, by a bomb thrown under his carriage by a former student. 
Russia breathed more easily. 

65s 



656 RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

The various liberal and advanced elements of the population 
uttered their desires with a freedom such as they had never known 
. before. They demanded that the reign of law be established 

defense of in Russia, that the era of bureaucratic and police control, 
assassination j-g^ognizing no limits of inquisition and of cruelty, should 
cease. They demanded the individual rights usual in western Europe, 
freedom of conscience, of speech, of publication, of public meetings 
and associations, of justice administered by independent judges. 
They also demanded a constitution, to be framed by the people, 
and a national parliament. 

The Czar showing no inclination to accede to these demands, dis- 
order continued and became more widespread, particularly when the 
shameful facts became known that officials were enriching them- 
selves at the expense of the national honor, selling for private gain 
supplies intended for the army, even seizing the funds of the Red 
Cross Society. The war continued to be a series of humiliating 
and sanguinary defeats, and on January i, 1905, came the surrender 
of Port Arthur after a fearful siege. The horror of the civilized 
"Bloody world was aroused by an event which occurred a few weeks 
Sunday" later, the slaughter of "Bloody Sunday" (January 22, 1905). 
Workmen in immense numbers, under the leadership of a radical 
priest, Father Gapon, tried to approach the Imperial Palace in St. 
Petersburg, hoping to be able to lay their grievances directly before 
the Emperor, as they had no faith in any of the officials. Instead 
of that they were attacked by the Cossacks and the regular troops 
and the result was a fearful loss of life, how large cannot be accurately 
stated. 

All through the year 1905 tumults and disturbances occurred. 
Peasants burned the houses of the nobles. Mutinies in the army 
and navy were frequent. The uncle of the Czar, the Grand Duke 
Sergius, one of the most pronounced reactionaries in the Empire, 
who had said "the people want the stick," was assassinated. Russia 
^ „ . was in a state bordering on anarchy. Finally the Czar sought 

The Mam- ° . . . ,. ..,.. 

festo of Au- to reduce the ever-mountmg spirit of opposition by issuing a 
gust 19, 190S manifesto concerning the representative assembly which was 
so vehemently demanded (August 19, 1905). The manifesto proved 
a bitter disappointment, as it spoke of the necessity of preserving 
autocratic government and promised a representative assembly 
which should only have the power to give advice, not to see that its 



CREATION OF THE DUMA 657 

advice was followed. The agitation therefore continued unabated, 
or rather increased, assuming new and alarming aspects, which 
exerted in the end a terrific pressure upon the Government. Finally 
the Czar on October 30, 1905, issued a new manifesto which promised 
freedom of conscience, speech, meeting, and association, also jhe Emperor 
a representative assembly or Duma, to be elected on a wide promises a 
franchise, establishing "as an immutable rule that no law can trve^lssem- 
come into force without the approval of the Duma," and giving ^^y "^ Duma 
to the Duma also effective control over the acts of public officials. 



THE DUMA OR REPRESENTATIVE ASSEMBLY 

The Czar thus promised the Duma, which was to be a law-making 
body and was to have a supervision over state officials. But before 
it met he proceeded to clip its wings. He issued a decree 
constituting the Council of the Empire, that is, a body consist- restricted^ 
ing largely of official appointees from the bureaucracy, or of the Council of 

• , • , 1 , , , r 1 • V- , ^ the Empire 

persons associated with the old order of things, as a kind of 
Upper Chamber of the legislature, of which the Duma should be the 
Lower. Laws must have the consent of both Council and Duma 
before being submitted to the Czar for approval. 

The elections to the Duma were held in March and April, 1906, and 
resulted in a large majority for the Constitutional Democrats, popu- 
larly called the "Cadets." In the name of the Czar certain „ . . . ^ ^ 

■^ Restricted by 

"organic laws" were now issued, laws that Could not be the " organic 
touched by the Duma. Thus the powers of that bod)^ were '^^^ 
again restricted, before it had even met. 

The Duma was opened by Nicholas II in person with elaborate 
ceremony. May 10, 1906. It was destined to have a short and 
stormy life. It showed from the beginning that it desired a ^ . 
comprehensive reform of Russia along the well-known lines of the Duma, 
western liberalism. It was combated by the court and ^^^ ^°' ''"^ 
bureaucratic parties, which had not been able to prevent its meeting, 
but which were bent upon rendering it powerless, and were only 
waiting for a favorable time to secure its abolition. It demanded 
that the Council of the Empire, the second chamber, should ,^ 

. 1 1 • , Demands 

be reformed, as it was under the complete control of the of the 
Emperor, and was thus able to nullify the work of the people's ^""* 
chamber. It demanded that the ministers be made responsible 



658 RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN 

to the Duma as the only way of giving the people control over the 
officials. It demanded the abolition of martial law throughout the 
Empire, under cover of which all kinds of crimes were being per- 
petrated by the governing classes. It passed a bill abolishing capital 
punishment. As the needs of the peasants were most pressing, it 
demanded that the lands belonging to the state, the crown, and the 
monasteries be given to them on long lease. 

The Duma lasted a little over two months. Its debates were 
marked by a high degree of intelligence and by frequent displays of 

The im o- eloquence, in which several peasants distinguished themselves. 

tence of the It criticized the abuses of the Government freely and scath- 
""^ ingly. Its sessions were often stormy, the attitude of the 

ministers frequently contemptuous. It was foiled in all its attempts 
at reform by the Council of the Empire, and by the Czar. 

The crucial contest was over the responsibility of ministers. The 
Duma demanded this as the only way of giving the people an effective 
participation in the government. The Czar steadily refused. A 
deadlock ensued. The Czar cut the whole matter short by dissolving 
the Duma, on July 22, 1906, expressing himself as " cruelly disap- 
pointed" by its actions, and ordering elections for a new Duma. 

The second Duma was opened by the Czar March 5, 1907. It did 
not work to the satisfaction of the Government. Friction between it 

The second ^^^ the ministry developed early and steadily increased. 

Duma Finally the Government arrested sixteen of the members 

and indicted many others for carrying on an alleged revolutionary 
propaganda. This was, of course, a vital assault upon the integrity 
of the assembly, a gross infringement upon even the most moderate 
constitutional liberties. Preparing to contest this high-handed 
action, the Duma was dissolved on June 16, 1907, and a new one 
ordered to be elected in September, and to meet in November. 
An imperial manifesto was issued at the same time altering the 
electoral law in most sweeping fashion, and practically be- 

aiters the stowing the right of choosing the large majority of the members 

electoral upon about 130,000 landowners. This also was a grave in- 

SVStBIU 

fringement upon the constitutional liberties hitherto granted, 
which had, among other things, promised that the electoral law should 
not be changed without the consent of the Duma. 

The Government declared by word and by act that the autocracy of 
the ruler was undiminished. Illegalities of the old, familiar kind 



THE TRIUMPH OF REACTION 659 

were committed freely by officials. Reaction ruled unchecked. 
The third Duma, elected on a very limited and plutocratic The third 
suffrage, was opened on November 14, 1907. It was com- Duma 
posed in large measure of reactionaries, of large landowners. It 
proved a docile assembly. 

The Government did not dare to abolish the Duma outright, 
as urged by the reactionaries. The Duma continued to exist, but 
was rather a consultative than a legislative body. With the 
mere passage of time it took on more and more the character persists, but 
of a permanent institution, exerting a feeble influence on the without 

power 

national life. However, the Government of Russia became 
again in practice what it had been before the war with Japan, what 
it had been all through the nineteenth century. The tremendous 
struggle for liberty had failed. The former governing classes 
recovered control of the state, after the stormy years from 1904 
to 1907, and applied once more their former principles. Among 
these were renewed attacks upon the Finns, increasingly severe 
measures against the Poles, and savage treatment of the Jews. 
Russia was still wedded to her idols, or at least her idols had not 
been overthrown. Her medieval past was still the strongest force 
in the state, to which it still gave a thoroughly medieval tone. 
Whether the war of 19 14 would result in accomplishing what the war 
with Japan began but did not achieve, a sweeping reformation of the 
institutions and policies, ambitions and mental outlook of the nation, 
was, of course, the secret of the future. 

REFERENCES 

The Annual Register ; The International Year Book; Statesman's Year Book. 
Volumes since 1905. Sections on Russia. Olgin, The Soul of the Russian 
Revolution. 



CHAPTER XXXV 

THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 

THE PEACE MOVEMENT 

The contemporary world, to a degree altogether unprecedented in 
history, has been dominated by the thought of war, by extraordinary 
preparations for war, and by zealous and concerted efforts to prevent 
war. Finally a conflict came which staggered the imagination and 
beggared description and whose issues were incalculable, a conflict 
which soon clamped the entire world in its iron grip. This was a 
ghastly outcome of a century of development, rich beyond compare 
in many lines. It is, however, not inexplicable and it is important 
for us to see how so melancholy, so sinister a turn has been given 
to the destinies of the race. 

The rise and development of the militaristic spirit have been showai 
in the preceding pages. The Prussian military system, marked by 
Spread of scientific thoroughness and efficiency, has been adopted by 
militarism most of the countries of the Continent. Europe became in the 
last quarter of the nineteenth century what she had never been before, 
literally an armed continent. The rivalry of the nations to have the 
most perfect instruments of destruction, the strongest army, and the 
strongest navy, became one of the most conspicuous features of the 
modern world. Ships of war were made so strong that they could 
resist attack. New projectiles of terrific force were consequently 
required and the torpedo was invented. A new agency would be 
useful to discharge this missile and thus the torpedo boat was de- 
veloped. To neutralize it was therefore the immediate necessity 
and the torpedo-boat destroyer was the result. Boats that could 
navigate beneath the waters would have an obvious advantage 
over those that could be seen, and the submarine was provided for 
this need. And finally men took possession of the air with dirigible 
balloons and aeroplanes, as aerial auxiliaries of war. Thus man's 

660 



THE FIRST HAGUE CONFERENCE 66 1 

immemorial occupation, war, gained from the advance of science and 
contributed to that advance. The wars of the past were fought on the 
surface of the globe. Those of the present are fought in the heavens 
above, and in the earth beneath, and in the waters under the earth. 
But all this is tremendously expensive. It costs more than a hun- 
dred thousand dollars to construct the largest coast defense gun, 
which carries over twenty miles, and its single discharge costs 
a thousand dollars. Fifteen millions are necessary to build a modern 
dreadnought, and now we have super-dreadnoughts, more instruments 

^ of war 

costly Still and more destructive. The debts of European 
countries were nearly doubled during the last thirty years, largely 
because of military expenditures. The military budgets of European 
states in a time of "armed peace" amounted to not far from a billion 
and a half dollars a year, half as much again as the indemnity exacted 
by Germany from France in 1871. The burden became so heavy, the 
rivalry so keen that it gave rise to a movement which aimed to end it. 
The very aggravation of the evil prompted a desire for its cure. 

In the summer of 1898 the civil and military authorities of Russia 
were considering how they might escape the necessity of replacing an 
antiquated kind of artillery with a more modern but very expensive 
one. Out of this discussion emerged the idea that it would be 
desirable, if possible, to check the increase of armaments. This 
could not be achieved by one nation alone but must be done by 
all, if done at all. The outcome of these discussions was the and the^ 
issuance by the Czar, Nicholas II, on August 24, 1898, of a limitation of 

. ... armaments 

communication to the powers, suggesting that an inter- 
national conference be held to consider the general problem. 

The conference, thus suggested by the Czar, was held at the Hague 
in 1899. Twenty-six of the fifty-nine sovereign governments of the 
world were represented by one hundred members. Twenty 
of these states were European, four were Asiatic — China, peace Con- 
Japan, Persia, and Siam, — and two were American — the ^?^^^^ ^* 
United States and Mexico. The Conference was opened on 
May 18 and closed on July 29. 

The official utterances of most of the delegates emphasized the 
frightful burden and waste of this vast expenditure upon the equip- 
ment for war, when all nations, big and little, needed all their criticism of 
resources for the works of peace, for education, for social militarism 
improvement in many directions. Most of the delegates emphasized 



662 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 

also the loss entailed by compulsory military service, removing mil- 
lions and millions of young men from their careers, from productive 
activity for several precious years. A German delegate, on the other 
hand, denied all this, denied that the necessary weight of charges 
and taxes portended approaching ruin and exhaustion, declared that 
the general welfare was increasing all the while, and that compulsory 
military service was not regarded in his country as a heavy burden 
but as a sacred and patriotic dut)^ to which his country owed its 
existence, its prosperity, and its future. 

With such differences of opinion the Conference was unable to 
reach any agreement upon the fundamental question which had given 
rise to its convocation. It could only adopt a resolution expressing 
the belief that "a limitation of the military expenses which now 
burden the world is greatly to be desired in the interests of the 
material and moral well-being of mankind" and the desire that the 
governments "shall take up the study of the possibility of an agree- 
ment concerning the limitation of armed forces on land and sea, and 
of military budgets." 

With regard to arbitration the Conference was more successful. It 
established a Permanent Court of Arbitration for the purpose of facili- 
Estabiish- fating arbitration in the case of international disputes which 
ment of a it is found impossible to settle by the ordinary means of 
Court of diplomacy. The Court does not consist of a group of judges 

Arbitration holding sessions at stated times to try such cases as may be 
brought before it. But it is provided that each power "shall select 
not more than four persons of recognized competence in questions 
of international law, enjoying the highest moral reputation and 
disposed to accept the duties of arbitrators," and that their appoint- 
ment shall run for six years and may be renewed. Out of this long 
list the powers at variance may choose, in a manner indicated, the 
judges who shall decide aijy given case. 

Recourse to this Court is optional, but the Court is always ready to 
be invoked. Arbitration is entirely voluntary with the parties to a 
quarrel, but if they wish to arbitrate, the machinery is at hand, a fact 
which is, perhaps, an encouragement to its use. 

The work of the First Peace Conference was very limited and mod- 
est, yet encouraging. But that the new century was to bring not 
peace but a sword, that force still ruled the world, was shortly 
apparent. Those who were optimistic about the rapid spread of 



THE SECOND HAGUE CONFERENCE 663 

arbitration as a principle destined to regulate the international 

relations of the future were sadly disappointed by the meager results 

of the Conference, and were still more depressed by subsequent 

events. For almost on the very heels of this Conference, tie^h century 

which it was hoped would further the interests of peace, came "p^^s with 

the devastating war in South Africa, followed quickly by the 

war between Russia and Japan. Also the expenditures of European 

states upon armies and navies continued to increase, and at an 

even faster rate than ever. During the eight years, from 1898 to 

1906, they augmented nearly £70,000,000, the sum total mounting 

from £250,000,000 to £320,000,000. 

Such was the disappointing sequel of the Hague Conference. But 
despite discouragements the friends of peace were active, and finally 
brought about the Second Conference at the Hague in 1907. 
This also was called by Nicholas II, though President Roose- Perce Con*- 
velt had first taken the initiative. The Second Conference Terence at 
was in session from June 15 to October 18. It was attended by 
representatives from forty-four of the world's fifty-seven states 
claiming sovereignty in 1907. The number of countries represented 
in this Conference, therefore, was nearly double that represented in 
the first, and the number of members was more than double, mount- 
ing from one hundred to two hundred and fifty-six. The chief addi- 
tions came from the republics of Central and South America. The 
number of American governments represented rose, indeed, from 
two to nineteen. Twenty-one European, nineteen American, and 
four Asiatic states sent delegates to this Second Conference. Its 
membership illustrated excellently certain features of our day, 
among others the indubitable fact that we live in an age of world 
politics, that isolation no longer exists, either of nation or of hemi- 
spheres. The Conference was not European but international, — 
the majority of the states were non-European. 

The Second Conference accomplished much useful work in the 
adoption of conventions regulating the actual conduct of war in more 
humane fashion, and in defining certain aspects of interna- work of the 
tional law with greater precision than heretofore. But, con- Conference 
cerning compulsory arbitration, and concerning disarmament or the 
limitation of armaments, nothing was achieved. It passed this 
resolution : "The Conference confirms the resolution adopted by the 
Conference of 1899 in regard to the restriction of military expendi- 



664 THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 

tures ; and, since military expenditures have increased considerably 
in nearly every country since the said year, the Conference declares 
that it is highly desirable to see the governments take up the serious 
study of the question." 

This Platonic resolution was adopted unanimously. A grim com- 
mentary on its importance in the eyes of the governments was 
contained in the history of the succeeding years with their ever 
increasing military and naval appropriations, their tenser rivalry, 
their deepening determination to be ready for whatever the future 
might have in store. 

That future had in store for 191 2 and 191 3 two desperate wars in 
the Balkan peninsula and for 19 14 an appalling cataclysm. 

THE COLLAPSE OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE 

We have seen with what enthusiasm the bloodless revolution of 
July 24, 1908, was hailed by all the races of Turkey. It seemed the 
, . ^ brilliant dawn of a new era. It has, however, proved to be the 

The Turkish . . 

Revolution beginning of the end of the Turkish Empire in Europe, if not 
of 1908 ^^ ^g-g^ g^g well. From that day to the outbreak of the Euro- 

pean War six years later the Balkan peninsula was the storm center 
of the world. Event succeeded event, swift, startling, and sensa- 
tional, throwing a lengthening and deepening shadow before. No 
adequate description of these crowded years can be attempted here. 
Only an outline can be given indicating the successive stages of a 
portentous and absorbing drama. 

The ease with which the Young Turks overthrew in those July days 
of 1908 the loathsome regime of Abdul Hamid, and the principles of 
freedom and fair play which they proclaimed, aroused the 
unanimity of happiest anticipations, and enlisted the liveliest sympathy 
the move- among multitudes within and without the Empire. The 
very atmosphere was charged with the hope and the expec- 
tation that the reign of liberty, equality, and fraternity was about to 
begin for this sorely visited land where unreason in all its varied forms 
had hitherto held sway. Would not Turkey, rejuvenated, modern- 
ized, and liberalized, strong in the loyalty and well-being of its 
citizens, freed from the blighting inheritance of its gloomy past, 
take an honorable place at last in the family of humane and pro- 
gressive nations? Might not the old racial and religious feuds dis- 



THE TURKISH REVOLUTION 665 

appear under a new regime, where each locaUty would have a certain 
autonomy, large enough to insure essential freedom in religion and in 
language? Might not a strong national patriotism be developed 
out of the polyglot conditions by freedom, a thing which despotism 
had never been able to evoke ? Might not Turkey become a stronger 
nation by adopting the principles of true toleration toward all her . 
various races and religions ? Had not the time come for the elimina- 
tion of these primitive but hardy prejudices and animosities ? Might 
not races and creeds be subordinated to a large and essential unity ? 
Might not this be the final, though unexpected, solution of the famous 
Eastern Question ? 

Even in those golden days some doubted, not seeing any authentic 
signs of an impending millennium for that distracted corner of the 
world. At least the problem of so vast a transformation would be 
very difficult. The unanimity shown in the joyous destruction of the 
old system might not be shown in the construction of the new, as 
many precedents in European history suggested. If Turkey were 
let alone to concentrate her entire energy upon the impending . . 
work of reform, she might perhaps succeed. But she was not foreign 
to be let alone now any more than she had been for centuries, p"^®""^ 
The Eastern Question had long perplexed the powers of Europe, and 
had at the same time lured them on to seek their own advantage in its 
labyrinthine mazes. It was conspicuously an international problem. 
But the internal reform of Turkey might profoundly alter her inter- 
national position by increasing the power of the Empire. 

Thus it came about that the July Revolution of 1908 instantly 
riveted the attention of European powers and precipitated a series of 
startling events. Might not a reformed Turkey, animated with a 
new national spirit, with her arm}' and finances reorganized and 
placed upon a solid basis, attempt to recover complete control of 
some of the possessions which, as we have seen, had been really, 
though not nominally and technically, torn from her — Bosnia, 
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Crete, possibly Cyprus, possibly Egypt? 
There was very little evidence to show that the Young Turks had 
any such intention or dreamed of entering upon so hazardous an 
adventure. Indeed, it was quite apparent that they asked nothing 
better than to be let alone, fully recognizing the intricacy of their 
immediate problem, the need of quiet for its solution. But the 
extremity of one is the opportunity of another. 



666 



THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 



On October 3, 1908, Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria-Hungary 
announced, through autograph letters to various rulers, his decision 
to incorporate Bosnia and Herzegovina definitely within his Empire. 
Austria- These were Turkish provinces, handed over by the Congress 

Hungary of Berlin in 1878 to Austria- Hungary for "occupation" and 

Bosnia and administration, though they still remained officially under 
Herzegovina ^-^g suzerainty of the Porte. On October 5 Prince Ferdinand 
of Bulgaria proclaimed, amid great ceremony, the complete inde- 
pendence of Bulgaria from Turkish suzerainty, and assumed 
declares her the title of Czar. Two daj^s later the Greek population of the 
independence ^gj^j^^j Qf Crete repudiated all connection with Turkey and 
declared for union with Greece. On the same day, October 7, Francis 
Joseph issued a proclamation 
to the people of Bosnia and 
Herzegovina announcing the 
annexation of those prov- 
inces. Against this action 
Serbia protested vigorously 
to the powers, her parliament 
was immediately convoked, 
and the war spirit flamed up 
and threatened to get beyond 
control. Ferdinand was pre- 
pared to defend the independ- 
ence of Bulgaria by going to 
waf with Turkey, if neces- 
sary. 

These startling events im- 
mediately aroused intense ex- 
citement throughout Europe. 
They constituted vio- 
lent breaches of the 
Treaty of Berlin. The 
crisis precipitated by 
the actions of Austria- 
Hungary and Bulgaria brought all the great powers, signatories of 
that treaty, upon the scene. It became quickly apparent that they 
did not agree. Germany made it clear that she would support 
Austria, and Italy seemed likely to do the same. The Triple 



The powers 
do not pre- 
vent these 
breaches of 
the Treaty 
of Berlin 




Francis Joseph 
From a photograph taken in 1915. 



BREACHES IN THE TREATY OF BERLIN 667 

Alliance, therefore, remained firm. In another group were 
Great Britain, France, and Russia, their precise position not 
clear, but plainly irritated at the defiance of the Treaty of 
Berlin. A tremendous interchange of diplomatic notes ensued. 
The British Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grej', announced that 
Great Britain could not admit "the right of any power to alter an 
international treaty without the consent of the other parties to it," 
and demanded that, as the public law of the Balkans rested upon the 
Treaty of Berlin of 1878, and that as that treaty was made by all the 
great powers, it could only be revised by the great powers, meeting 
again in Congress. But neither Austria nor Germany would listen 
to this suggestion. They knew that Russia could not intervene, 
lamed, as she was, by the disastrous war with Japan, with her army 
disorganized and her finances in bad condition. And they had no 
fear of Great Britain and France. Thus the Treaty of Berlin was 
flouted, although later the signatories of that treaty formally recog- 
nized the accomplished fact. 

Of all the states the most aggrieved by these occurrences was Serbia, 
and the most helpless. For years the Serbians had entertained the 
ambition of uniting Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Mon- 
tenegro, peopled by members of the same Serbian race, thus 
restoring the Serbian empire of the Middle Ages, and gaining access 
to the sea. This plan was blocked, apparently forever. Serbia 
could not expand to the west, as Austria barred the way with Bosnia 
and Herzegovina. She could not reach the sea.' Thus she could get 
her products to market only with the consent of other nations. She 
alone of all the states in Europe, with the exception of Switzerland, 
was in this predicament. Fearing that she must thus become a 
vassal state, probably to her enemy, Austria-Hungary, seeing all 
possibility of expansion ended, all hopes of combining the Serbs of 
the Balkans under her banner frustrated, the feeling was strong 
that war, even against desperate odds, was preferable to strangula- 
tion. However, she did not fly to arms. But the feeling of anger 
and alarm remained, an element in the general situation that could 
not be ignored, auguring ill for the future. 

But trouble for the Young Turks came not only from the outside. 
It also came from inside and, as was shortly seen, it lay in large 
measure in their own unwisdom. Difficulties manifold encompassed 
them about. 



668 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 

The new Turkish ParUament met in December, 1908, amid general 

enthusiasm. It consisted of two chambers, a Senate, appointed 

On' f ^^ ^^^ Sultan, and a Chamber of Deputies, elected by the 

the Turkish people. Four months later events occurred which threatened 

ar lament ^j^^ abrupt termination of this experiment in constitutional 

and parliamentary government. On April 13, 1909, without warning, 

thousands of troops in Constantinople broke into mutiny, killed some 

_. , of their oflficers, denounced the Young Turks, and demanded 

The counter- " ' 

revolution the abolition of the constitution. The city was terrorized. 

o pr , 1909 ^^ ^j^g same time sickening massacres occurred in Asia Minor, 
particularly at Adana, showing that the religious and racial animos- 
ities of former times had lost none of their force. It seemed that 

_. -, the new regime was about to founder utterlv. A counter- 

The Young ° 

Turks re- revolution was to undo the work of July. But this counter- 
gam contro revolution was energetically suppressed by troops sent up 
from Salonica and Adrianople and the Young Turks were soon in 
power again. Holding that the mutiny had been inspired and 
organized by the Sultan, who had corrupted the troops so that he 
might restore the old regime, they resolved to terminate his rule. 
. On April 27, 1909, Abdul Hamid II was deposed, and was im- 

of Abdul mediately taken as a prisoner of state to Salonica. , He was 

^^™* succeeded by his brother, whom he had kept imprisoned many 

years. The new Sultan, Mohammed V, was in his sixty-fourth 
year. He at once expressed his entire sympathy with the armies of 
the Young Turks, his intention to be a constitutional monarch. 
The Young Turks were in power once more. 

From the very beginning they failed. They did not rise to the 
height of their opportunity, they did not meet the expectations that 
had been aroused, they did not loyally live up to the principles they 
The Young professcd. They made no attempt to introduce the spirit 
Turks be- of justicc, of fair play toward the various elements of their 
tionary and highly Composite empire. Instead of seeking to apply the prin- 
despotic ciples of liberty, equality, and fraternity, they resorted to auto- 

cratic government, to domination by a single race, to the ruthless 
suppression of the rights of the people. They did just what the 
Germans have done in Alsace-Lorraine and Posen, what the Russians 
have done in Finland and in Poland, what the Austrians and Hunga- 
rians have done with the Slavic peoples within their borders. The 
policy of oppression of subject races, the attempt at amalgamation by 



POLICY OF TURKIFICATION 669 

force and craft, have strewn Europe with combustible material and 
the combustion has finally come. The government of the Young 
Turks was just as despotic as that of Abdul Hamid and its „ 

J IT Oppression 

outcome was the same, a further and decisive disruption of the of subject 

T^ • races 

Empire. 

From the very first they showed their purpose. They, the Turks, that 
is the Mohammedan ruling race, determined to keep power absolutely 
in their own hands by hook or crook. In the very first elections 
to Parliament they arranged affairs so that they would-have a major- 
ity over all other races combined. They did not intend to divide 
power with the Christian Greeks and Armenians or the Mohammedan 
Arabs. Their policy was one of Turkification, just as the a policy of 
Russian policy was one of Russification, the German of Ger- Turkification 
manization. They made no attempt to punish the perpetrators of 
the Adana massacres in which over thirty thousand Armenian Chris- 
tians were slaughtered. The Armenian population was thus alienated 
from them. They tried to suppress the liberties which under all 
previous regimes the Orthodox Greek Church had enjoyed. As 
they intended to subject all the races of the Empire to their own 
race, so they intended to suppress by force all religious privileges. 
They thus offended and infuriated the Greeks, whom they also 
alarmed and embittered by a commercial boycott because the Greeks 
would not agree to their repressive policy in regard to the Cretans. 
Their treatment of Macedonia was the acme of folly. They ^ 

•' ■' Gross mis- 

sought to reenforce the Moslem elements of the population rule of 
by bringing in Moslems from other regions. This aroused ^"^^ ^^^^ 
the Christian elements, Greek, Bulgarian, and Serbian. Large 
numbers of these Christians fled from Macedonia to Greece, Bulgaria, 
and Serbia, carrying with them their grievances, urging the govern- 
ments of those countries to hostility against the Turks. 

The Turks went a step farther. In the west were the Albanians, a 
Moslem people who had hitherto combined local independence with 
loyal and appreciated services to the Turkish authorities, t,, . , , 

' Their treat- 
in both the army and the government. The Turks decided ment of 

to suppress this independence and to make the Albanians ^^^"^^ 

submit in all matters to the authorities at Constantinople. But the 

Albanians had been for centuries remarkable fighters. They now 

flew to arms. Year after year the Albanian rebellion broke out, only 

temporarily subdued or smothered by the Turks, who thus exhausted 



670 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 

their strength and squandered their resources in fruitless but costly- 
efforts to "pacify" these hardy war-loving mountaineers. 

Thus only a few years of Young Turk rule were necessary to create 
a highly critical situation, so numerous were the disaffected elements. 
There had been no serious attempt to regenerate Turkey, to bring 
together the various races on the basis of liberty for all. Turkey 
lost hundreds of thousands of its Christian subjects who fled to 
surrounding countries rather than endure the odious oppression. 
These exiles did what they could to hit back at their oppressors. 

The Young Turks from the very beginning failed as reformers be- 
cause they were untrue to their promises. Their failure led to war 
The Young in the Balkans and the war in the Balkans led to the European 
uTtheir^'^^ War. They spent their time in endeavoring to assert them- 
promises selves as a race of masters. They sowed the wind and they 
quickly reaped the whirlwind. 



THE TURKO-ITALIAN WAR OF 191 1 

While the Turkish Empire was in this highly perturbed condition 
and while the Balkan states were aglow with indignation at the treat- 
ment being meted out to the members of their races resident in Mace- 
donia and were trembling with the desire to act, trouble flared up for 
J .. . the Young Turks in another quarter. Italy had for years been 
niai aspira- casting longing cyes on the territories which fringe the southern 
shores of the Mediterranean. She had once hoped to acquire 
Tunis but had unexpectedly found herself forestalled by France, 
which seized that country in 188 1. At the same time England 
began her occupation of Egypt. All that remained, therefore, was 
Tripoli, like Egypt a part of the Turkish Empire. For many years 
the thought that this territory ought to belong to Italy had been 
accepted as axiomatic in influential quarters in the Italian govern- 
ment and diplomatic circles. Schemes had been worked out and 
partly put into force for a "pacific penetration" of an economic 
character of this land. Now, however, the time seemed to have 
arrived to seize it outright. Austria-Hungary had annexed Bosnia 
and Herzegovina, and Bulgaria had declared her independence in 
1908, and there had been no successful opposition on the part of 
Turkey or of any of the Great Powers. Was not this the ripe 
moment for Italy's project? 



ITALY AND TRIPOLI 671 

She evidently thought so, for, in September, 191 1, she sent her 
warships to Tripoli and began the conquest of that country. It 
proved a more difficult undertaking than had been imagined, itaiy invades 
While she seized the coast towns, her hold on them was pre- Tripoli (191 1) 
carious and her progress into the interior was slow and costly, 
owing to the fact that the Turks aroused and directed the natives 
against the invaders. Italy had given her ally, Austria-Hungary, to 
understand that she would not attack Turkey directly in Europe, 
as European Turkey was a veritable tinder-box which, if it once 
caught fire, might blaze up into a devastating and incalculable 
conflagration. But as month after month went by and Italy 
was producing only an uncertain effect in Tripoli, she resolved ish islands 
on more decisive action nearer Constantinople, hoping to '" ^^^ 
bring the Turks to terms. She attacked and seized Rhodes and 
eleven other Turkish islands in the ^gean, the Dodecanese. This, 
and the fact that an Albanian revolution against the Turks was at 
the same time attaining alarming proportions, made the latter 
ready to conclude peace with Italy so that they might be free to put 
down the Albanians. On October 15, 1912, was signed at Treaty of 
Ouchy, or Lausanne, a treaty whereby Turkey relinquished Lausanne 
Tripoli. It was also provided that Italy should withdraw her troops 
from the Dodecanese as soon as the Turkish troops were withdrawn 
from Tripoli, a phrase about which it was easy to quibble later. 

The great significance of this war did not lie in the fact that Italy 
acquired a new colony. It lay in the fact that it began again the 
process, arrested since 1878, of the violent dismemberment of Momentous 
the Turkish Empire ; that it revealed the military weakness of character of 
that Empire, powerless to preserve its integrity ; and, what Turkish 
is most important, that it contributed directly and greatly to ^^^ 
a far more serious attack upon Turkey by the Balkan states, which, 
in turn, led to the European War. The tinder-box was lighted and a 
general European conflagration resulted. The Italian attack upon 
Tripoli was momentous in its consequences. 

THE BALKAN WARS 

During the war the Balkan states were negotiating with each other 
with a view to united action against Turkey. This union was not 
easy to bring about as Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece disliked each 



672 THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 

other intensely, for historical, racial, sentimental reasons, too numer- 
ous and too complex to be described here. However, they disliked 
the Turks more and they were suffering constantly from the 
states unite Turks. Terrible persecutions, even massacres of the Chris- 
against the tians in Macedonia in which large numbers of Greeks, Bulgari- 

Turks * ^ 

ans, and Serbians lost their lives, inflamed the people of those 
states with the desire to liberate their brothers in Macedonia. By 
doing this they would also increase their own territories and diminish 
or end an odious tyranny. These nations found it possible to unite 
for the purpose of overwhelming the Turks ; they might not find 
it possible to agree as to the partition among themselves of any terri- 
tories they might acquire, since here their old, established ambitions 
and antipathies might conflict. It was because of the strength of 
these rivalries and hatreds that neither the Turks nor the outside 
powers considered an alliance of the Balkan states as at all among 
the possibilities. But the statesmen of the Balkans had learned 
something from the troubled history of the peninsula, and saw the 
folly of continuing their dissensions. They also realized that now 
was their chance, that they might never again find their common 
enemy so weak and demoralized, the general European situation so 
favorable. 

Thus it came about that in October, 191 2, the four Balkan states, 
Montenegro, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece, made war on Turkey. 

The Balkan The war was brief and an overwhelming success for the allies. 

Warofipiz Fighting began on October 15, the very day of the signing 

of the Treaty of Lausanne between Italy and Turkey, although 

technically the declarations of war were not issued until October 18. 

The Greeks pushed northward into Macedonia, gained several 

victories over the enemy, and on November 8, only three 

enter weeks after the beginning of the campaign, they entered the 

Saionica important city and port of Salonica, with Crown Prince Con- 

stantine at their head. Farther west the Serbians and Montene- 
grins were also successful. The Serbians won a great victory at 
Kumanovo where they avenged the defeat of their ancestors at 

The Serbians Kossova which they had not forgotten for five hundred years. 

victorious 1 

They then captured Monastir. 
Meanwhile the Bulgarians, who had the larger armies, had gone 
from victory to victory, defeating the Turks brilliantly in the battles 
of Kirk Kilisse and Lule Burgas. The latter was one of the great 



THE FIRST BALKAN WAR 673 

battles of modern times, three hundred and fifty thousand troops 
being involved in fierce, tenacious struggle for three days. The 
result was the destruction of the military power of the Turks, campaign of 
By the middle of November the Bulgarians had reached the ^^ . 
Chataldja line of fortifications which extend from the Sea of 
Marmora to the Black Sea. Only twenty-five miles beyond them 
lay Constantinople. 

The collapse of the Turkish power in Europe was nearly complete. 
Only the very important fortresses of Adrianople in the east, and Jan- 
ina and Scutari in the west, had not fallen. In a six weeks' „ ,, 

Collapse of 

campaign Turkish possessions in Europe had shrunk to Con- the Turkish 
stantinople and the twenty-five mile stretch west to the ^°^^^ 
Chataldja fortifications. This overthrow and collapse came as a 
staggering surprise to the Turks, the Balkan allies themselves, and 
the Great Powers. The Ottoman Empire in Europe had ceased to 
exist, with the exception of Constantinople, Adrianople, Janina, and 
Scutari. The military prestige of Turkey was gone. 

In December delegates from the various states met in London to 
make peace. They were unsuccessful because Bulgaria demanded 
the surrender of Adrianople, whicli the Turks flatly refused. 
In March, 191 3, therefore, the war was resumed. One after Peace Con- 
another the fortresses fell, Janina on March 6, Adrianople ^'^^^'^^ 
on March 26, Scutari on April 23. Turkey was now compelled to 
accept terms of peace. On May 30, the Treaty of London was signed. 
It provided that a line should be drawn from Enos on the ^gean Sea 
to Midia on the Black Sea and that all Turkey west of that line 
should be ceded to the allies, except a region of undefined dimensions 
on the Adriatic, Albania, whose boundaries and status should be 
determined by the Great Powers. Crete was ceded to the Great 
Powers and the decision as to the islands in the yEgean which 
Greece had seized was also left to them. In December, 191 3, of LondTn^ 
Crete was incorporated in the kingdom of Greece. The Sul- ''^^y 30, 
tan's dominions in Europe had shrunk nearly to the vanishing 
point. After five centuries of proud possession he found himself 
almost expelled from Europe, retaining still Constantinople and only 
enough territorj^ round about to protect it. This great achievement 
was the work of the four Balkan states, united for once in the common 
work of liberation. The Great Powers had done nothing. Europe 
felt relieved, however, that so great a change as this in the map of 



674 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 

the Balkan peninsula had been effected without involving the Great 
Powers in war. 

The Treaty of London, however, had not long to live. No sooner 
had the Balkan states conquered Turkey than they fell to fighting 
A short- among themselves over the division of the spoils. The re- 

lived peace sponsibility for this calamity does not rest solely with them. 
It rests in part with the Great Powers, particularly with Austria and 
Italy. It was the intervention of these powers and their insistence 
upon the creation of a new independent state, Albania, out of a part of 
the territory now relinquished by the Turks, that precipitated a crisis 
whose very probable issue would be war. For the creation of this 
new state on the Adriatic coast absolutely prevented Serbia 
Serbia still ' from realizing one of her most passionate and legitimate 
land-locked ambitions, an outlet to the sea, an escape from her land- 
locked condition which placed her at the mercy of her neighbors. 

Before beginning the war with the Turks, Serbia and Bulgaria had 
defined their future spheres of influence in upper Macedonia, should 
the war result in their favor. The larger part of Macedonia should 
go to Bulgaria, and Serbia's gains should be chiefly in the west, in- 
cluding the longed-for Adriatic seacoast. But now Albania was 
Austrian op- pl^ntcd there and Serbia was as land-locked as ever. Austria 
position to was resolved that Serbia should under no conditions become 
^"^ '* an Adriatic state. She had always been opposed to the 

aggrandizement of Serbia, because she had millions of Serbs under 
her own rule who might be attracted to an independent Serbia, 
enlarged and with prestige heightened. Moreover she believed 
that Serbia would be the pawn of Russia, and she would not tolerate 
Russia's influence on her southern borders and along the Adriatic, 
if she could help it. She did not propose to be less important in those 
waters than she had been in the past. Therefore Serbia must be 
excluded from the Adriatic. It was the blocking of Serbia's outlet 
to the sea that caused the second Balkan war between the allies. 
Intense was the indignation of the Serbians, but they could do 
nothing. They therefore sought as partial compensation larger 
territories in Macedonia than their treaty with Bulgaria had assigned 
Claims of them, arguing, correctly enough, that the conditions had greatly 
Serbia and changed from those contemplated when that agreement was 
ugana made and that the new conditions justified and necessitated 

a new arrangement. But here they encountered the stubborn op- 



THE SECOND BALKAN WAR 675 

position of Bulgaria, which refused any concessions along this Une 
and insisted upon the strict observance of the treaty. Instantly 
the old, bitter hatred of these two countries for each other framed 
up again. The Serbians insisted that the expulsion of the Turks had 
been the work of all the allies and that there should be a fair division 
of the territories acquired in the name of all. On the other hand, the 
Bulgarians argued that it had been they who had done the heavy 
fighting in the war, which was true, that they had furnished by far 
the larger number of troops, that it was their victories at Kirk Kilisse 
and Lule Burgas that had annihilated the power of the Turks in 
Europe, that they were entitled to annex territories in Macedonia 
which they declared were peopled by Bulgarians. Other considera- 
tions also entered into the situation. 

Suffice it to say that Bulgaria intended to have her way. Her 
army was elated by the recent astounding successes, was rather con- 
temptuous of the Serbians and Greeks, emphatically minimized „ . . 
the services rendered by these to the common cause, thought compromis- 
that it could easily conquer both if necessary, and could take ^^^ ' 
what territories it chose. It was Bulgaria, whose war party had 
lost all sense of proportion, all sense of the rights of her former Bulgaria 
allies, that began the new struggle. She treacherously at- attacks 
tacked Greece and Serbia at the end of June, 1913. Fierce serb^a^^" 
fighting ensued for several days. (June, 1913) 

Bulgaria's action in plunging into this avoidable conflict was all the 
more foolhardy as her relations with her northern neighbor, Rou- 
mania, were also unsettled and precarious. Roumania had demanded 
that Bulgaria cede her a strip of territory in the northeast of 

.. iT^i, Roumania 

Bulgaria, m order that the balance of power among the Balkan enters the 
states might remain practically what it had been. Bulgaria ^" ^famst 

» i - » Bulgaria ; 

had refused this so-called compensation. The result was that the Turks 
Roumania also went to war with Bulgaria. . The Turks, too, ^ ^° 
seeing a chance to recover some of the land they had recently lost, 
joined the war. 

Thus Bulgaria was confronted on all sides by enemies. She was at 
war with five states, not three, for Montenegro was also involved. 
By the middle of July she saw that the case was hopeless and 
consented to make peace, by the Treaty of Bucharest, signed Bucharest 
August 10, 1915, by which Serbia and Greece secured larger 
possessions than they had ever anticipated, and by which Roumania 



676 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 




THE 

BALKAN STATES 

ACCORDING TO THE 
TREATY OF BUCHAREST 

Acquisitions of New Territory 
shown by darker hatching 
Scale of Miles 
60 100 150 200 



MEDITERliANEAIf \sEA 



22° 



COST OF THE BALKAN WARS 677 

was given the territory she desired. Turkey also recovered a large 
area which she had lost the year before, including the important city 
and fortress of Adrianople. All this was at the expense of Bulgaria, 
who paid for her arrogance and unconciliatory temper by losing much 
territory which she would otherwise have secured, by seeing her 
former and hated allies victorious over her in the field and in annexa- 
tions of territory which she regarded as rightfully hers. Bulgaria 
was deeply embittered by all this and only waited for an oppor- 
tunity to tear up the Treaty of Bucharest which she refused to 
consider as morally binding, as in any sense a permanent settle- 
ment of the Balkans. The year 191 3 will remain of bitter memory 
in the minds of all Bulgarians. 

The two Balkan wars cost heavily in human life and in treasure. 
Turkey and Bulgaria each lost over 150,000 in killed and wounded, 
Serbia over 70,000, Greece nearly as many, little IMonte- changes in 
negro over 10,000. The losses among non-combatants were *^* ™*p 
heavy in those who died from starvation, or disease, or massacre, for 
the second war was one of indisputable atrocity. On the other hand, 
Montenegro, Greece, and Serbia had nearly doubled .in size, cost of the 
Bulgaria and Roumania had grown. The Turkish Empire in Balkan wars 
Europe was limited to a comparatively small area. 

We must now examine the reaction of all these profound and aston- 
ishing changes in the Balkans upon Europe in general. In other 
words, we must study the causes of the war of 1914. For the 
Balkan wars of 191 2 and 19 13 were a prelude to the European thTBaikan 
War of 1914. The sequence of events from the Turkish wars upon 
Revolution of July, 1908, to the Austrian declaration of war 
upon Serbia in July, 19 14, is direct, unmistakable, disastrous. Each 
year added a link to the lengthening chain of iron. The map of 
Europe was thrown into the flames. What the new map would be 
no one could foresee. 

It may be said in passing that the new Albanian state proved a 
fiasco from the start and that it disappeared completely when the 
war began in August, 1914, the powers that had created it with- jhe Aiba- 
drawing their support and its German prince, William of Wied, ""^"^ fiasco 
leaving for Germany, where he joined the army that was fighting 
France. He had meanwhile announced his abdication in a high- 
flown manifesto. 



678 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 



REFERENCES 

The Regime of the Yoxjng Turks : Gibbons, The New Map of Europe, 
Chap. XI, pp. 180-219; Pears, Forty Years in Constantinople. 

The War between Italy and Turkey : Gibbons, Chap. XIII, pp. 241-262. 

The War between the Balkan States ant) Turkey : Gibbons, Chap. XIV, 
pp. 263-318; Schurman, The Balkan Wars, pp. 3-60; Seymour, The Diplomatic 
Background of the War, Chap. X. 

The War between the Balkan States : Gibbons, Chap. XV, pp. 319-350; 
Schurman, pp. 63-131 ; Sejonour, Chap. X. 

Albania : Chekrezi, C. A., Albania Past and Present. 



CHAPTER XXXVI 
THE WORLD WAR 

In August, 1913, the long-drawn-out crisis in the Balkans seemed 
safely over with the Treaty of Bucharest, to the apparent satisfaction 
of the people of Europe. It had not resulted in what had been ^^^^^ ^^ 
greatly feared, a European war. That had been avoided and Germany 
the world breathed more freely. But that this feeling was ^'fttTthe^ 
not shared by the governments of Austria and Germany has Balkan 
since been revealed. Though this was not publicly known until 
more than a year afterward, it is now established that on August 9, 
191 3, the day before the Treaty of Bucharest (bo-ka-rest') was 
formally signed, Austria informed her ally, Italy, that she proposed 
to take action against Serbia. She represented this proposed 
action as defensive and as therefore justifying her in expecting proposes war 
the aid of Italy under the terms of the treaty of the Triple Al- against 
liance. Italy through her prime minister, Giolitti, refused to ac- 
cede to this view, stating that such a war would not be one of de- 
fense on the part of Austria, as no one was thinking of attack- ^ 
ing her. The treaty of Triple Alliance required its members supported 
to aid each other only in the case of a defensive war forced upon ^^ ^*^'^ 
a colleague. Austria, then, planned war upon Serbia in August, 19 13. 
Whether she was restrained by the knowledge that Italy would not 
support her or by other considerations is a matter for conjecture. 

Prince von Biilow, who for nine years had been Chancellor of 
Germany, has declared that the collapse of Turke}^ was a blow to 
Germany, which meant that it imperiled the plans which _ 

■^ ' f i- Germany 

Germany was nourishing for expansion or influence in the prepares for 
Balkans and the East. It was on this ground that in 19 13 "^^ 
new army aiid taxation bills, extraordinarily increasing Germany's 
preparedness for war, were carried through. This inevitably led to 
similar, though not to as sweeping, legislation in France. 

679 



68o THE WORLD WAR 

Austria and Germany, therefore, were far from pleased at the 
outcome of events in the Balkans, and the former, a great European 
state of fifty millions, was planning action by arms against Serbia, 
a nation of now perhaps four millions, a nation both exhausted and 
elated by two years of war. Of course Austria knew that any such 
action would bring Russia upon the scene, and that was the reason 
for her desiring the eventual support of her two allies. While for 
reasons that are somewhat obscure, Austria finally did not consider 
the moment opportune for making war on Serbia in August, 19 13, 
she did consider it opportune in July, 19 14, and from her action at 
that time came swiftly and dramatically the Great War. 

The relations of Austria-Hungary and Serbia have already been 

alluded to, the former's annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 

1908, and her part in the creation of the new state of Albania 

Serbia often , , _ , . , . , 

humUiated by iov the Same purposc, to prevent Serbia s gettmg any outlet to 
Austria- j-j^g ggg^ Yet, though successful in this, she had not been able 

Hungary 

to prevent the growth of Serbia. Serbia had, however, sub- 
mitted in 1908 and 1909 and in 19 13, to demands which emanated 
from Austria- Hungary and which were deeply humiliating. On 
both sides there was, as there had long been, plenty of bad blood. 



ASSASSINATION OF ARCHDUKE FRANCIS FERDINAND 

Suddenly a horrible crime occurred which set in motion a mighty 

and lamentable train of events. On June 28, 1914, the Archduke 

Francis Ferdinand, nephew of the Emperor of Austria, and heir 

charged with to the throne, was, with his wife, assassinated in the streets 

the crime ^^ Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia. The men who had done 

the infamous deed were Austrian subjects, natives of Bosnia. But 

they were Serbians by race. An outburst of intense indignation 

followed against the Serbians, "a nation of assassins," it was declared. 

Serbia was, by Austrian opinion, held responsible, although the 

crime occurred on Austrian soil and was committed by Austrian 

subjects, and although Austrian methods of rule in Bosnia were of 

such a character as sufficiently to account for the dastardly crime. 

At any rate, the desire for war was expressed in many Austrian 

newspapers, which held the Serbian Government responsible. 

But four weeks went by and the Austrian Government took no 
action. No information could be obtained by the diplomats in 




pSSESSLONS 

^ POWERS 



90 105 120 135 150 



AUSTRIAN ULTIMATUM TO SERBIA 68i 

Vienna as to what she proposed to do. They saw no reason for any- 
particular worry, as the Government was evidently so self-contained, 
and they therefore took their usual vacations. It was intimated xhe pro- 
that Austria would make some demands upon Serbia, but that longed 
they would be of a moderate character. There was wide- the Austrian 
spread sympathy with her and a general feeling that she would Government 
be justified in demanding certain things of Serbia. The representa- 
tives of the various European governments were kept in ignorance. 
A despatch, which was destined to shake the very foundations of the 
world, was being fashioned, in utter silence and mystery. 



THE AUSTRIAN ULTIMATUM 

On July 23, Austria delivered this despatch to Serbia. It began 
by accusing the Serbian Government of not having fulfilled the 
obligations it had assumed in 1909 toward Austria. It de- 
manded that the Serbian Government should publish an official demands 
statement, the terms of which were dictated in the despatch, "''°*' ^^''^* 
expressing its disapproval of the propaganda in Serbia against 
Austria-Hungary and its regret that Serbian officials had taken part 
in this propaganda. In the despatch the murder of the Archduke 
was ascribed to that propaganda. Then followed ten demands upon 
the Serbian Government concerning the suppression of the Pan- 
Serbian propaganda carried on by the newspapers and the secret 
societies of Serbia. The despatch demanded that the Serbian 
Government should suppress any publication which fostered hatred 
of and contempt for the Austro- Hungarian monarch j-, should take 
the most comprehensive measures for the suppression and extinction 
of the secret societies, should eliminate from the schools all teachers 
and from text-books anything that served or might serve to foster 
the propaganda against Austria-Hungary, should remove from the 
army and from government positions all oflficials involved in the 
same propaganda, whose names the Austrian Government reserved 
the right to communicate, and that Serbia should accept the co- 
operation of Austrian officials in the work of investigating the con- 
spiracy of June 28. Other clauses in this fateful despatch concerned 
the arrest of the accomplices in the assassination and the prevention 
of the trade in arms and explosives across the frontier. Annexed 
to the despatch was a memorandum asserting that the murder of the 



682 THE WORLD WAR 

Archduke and the Archduchess had been plotted in Serbia and had 
been executed through the complicity of Serbian officials. 

This despatch, harsh in its language, dictatorial in its demands, 

was an ultimatum, for it required the acceptance of it in its entirety 

The d ~ t h '^i^^i^''^ forty-cight hours, and it allowed no time for investiga- 

an uiti- tion or discussion of the charges made and the problems created 

™* "™ by the peremptory demand. No nation would issue such a note 

to an equal without intending and without desiring war. Issued to a 

power vastly inferior, it could mean only unprecedented humiliation 

or national extinction, if followed up at the expiration of forty-eight 

hours. 

This Austrian ultimatum created a grave crisis. The ultimatum 
was not a passionate and unreflecting outburst of the Austrian Gov- 
ernment, swept away by a natural anger at the foul murders, 
ultimatum It was a cold-bloodcd and deliberate document, composed 
creates a after four wceks of secret preparation. The Russian ambassa- 

crflvc Crisis 

dor had not been told that it was coming and had left Vienna 

f(3r his vacation. The Italian Government had not been informed, 

although it was an ally and was particularly concerned with anything 

J . .- that affected the Balkan peninsula in any way or part. In 

cance for this fact Italy was to find her justification for remaining 

*^^ neutral when the war finally broke out, as she regarded that 

war as an aggressive one begun by Austria. The ultimatum gave 

Serbia the alternative of accepting egregiously humiliating conditions, 

practically reducing her to the state of a vassal of Austria, or of 

accepting war. 

England, France, and Russia tried to induce Austria to extend 

her time limit as the only way in which diplomacy might seek to 

The good ^ct in the matter, as, moreover, required if the relations of 

offices of nations were to be governed by a reasonable consideration for 

England, * ■' 

France, cach Other's rights or wishes. Their efforts were in vain. 

and Russia fhey then turned to Serbia, urging her, in the interests of 
Europe in general, to make her answer as conciliatory as possible. 
The result was that Serbia in her reply yielded to the greater part 
of what Austria demanded and that she offered, in case Austria was 
not satisfied with her answer, to refer the question to the Hague 
Tribunal or to a conference of the Great Powers. 

No state ever made a more complete submission under particularly 
humiliating circumstances. Austria, however, immediately declared 



THE AUSTRIAN CHALLENGE OF RUSSIA 683 

the Serbian answer unsatisfactory and prepared for war. She well 
knew that such action would necessarily draw Russia into the con- 
troversy. She had every reason a state could have for knowing 
that, after the defiance of the annexation of Bosnia and Herze- rejects 
govina in 1908, another attack upon a small Slavic people would Serbia's 
deeply offend the leading Slavic power. Austria could not 
and did not expect to be able to wreak her vengeance upon Serbia 
without having to take Russia into account. Hers, therefore, is 
the responsibility for a deliberate and highly dangerous prov- deliberately 
ocation of a great state. Russia, a Slavic power, could not provokes 

° ' t- > Russia 

be ignored by Teutonic powers in determining the future of 
Slavic peoples. If there was a single well-known fact in the whole 
domain of European politics it was that Russia was greatly interested 
in the fate of the Slav states of the Balkans. If there was any 
other well-established commonplace of European politics, it was this, 
that every Balkan question has always been considered as of general 
concern, as distinctly international. As a matter of fact, Serbia's 
obligations of 1909, already referred to, were undertaken to the 
Powers, not to Austria alone. 

Austria's position was that her action concerned herself and Serbia 
alone ; that no other nation or nations were involved or had any 
rights in the matter. In this she was supported from start to . j 
finish by Germany. Both Austria and Germany were aware supported by 
that warlike steps against Serbia would bring Russia into the ^^"""^^y 
question and that, owing to the obligations of the Triple and Dual 
Alliances, a general European war might result, yet both steadily 
refused to consider that Russia had any right to intervene ; it was 
all a matter solely between the two, Austria and Serbia. 

Naturally Russia did not take this view. Her warnings having 
proved unavailing, when Austria began to prepare for the attack 
upon Serbia, Russia began to mobilize. The policy of Ger- j^ . 
many through that last week of July was to support Austria begins to 
in her contention that this was her affair. She asserted that ™°^*''^® 
the quarrel was solely one between those two and that no outside 
power had the right to intervene, that, if the trouble could be kept 
confined to those two, there would be no general disturbance of the 
peace, that if the Czar, however, interfered there would be "on 
account of the various alliances, inconceivable consequences." 
If this was all that Germany did for peace, which she asserts she 



684 



THE WORLD WAR 



made every effort to maintain, then she did simply nothing, for this 
poUcy of "locaUzation of the conflict" begged the whole question. 
It assumed that neither Russia nor any other power was in any 
way concerned. This was an absolutely untenable position in the 
light of history, of reason, of interest. The question was a part of 
the Eastern Question which over and over has been considered and 
known to be emphatically 
international. No aspect 
of that question is to be 
left to the determination 
of a state of fifty millions 
in conflict with one of 
four or five. 

ENGLAND'S PROPOSAL 

A proposal was made 
by England that the ques- 
tion at issue should 
pro^pofesan be submitted to a 
international conference to be 

conference 

held in London by 
the Great Powers not di- 
rectly concerned, namely 
Germany, France, Eng- 
land, and Italy. Perhaps 
these four might bring 
about the adjustment of 
the diflrculties between 
Serbia and Austria and 
Russia. Russia signified 
declined by Germany. 




Sir Edward Grey 



her willingness, but the proposal was 
Other suggestions of a somewhat similar 
nature looking toward delay and diplomatic discussion or mediation 
likewise fell before the opposition or indifference of Germany. 
Germany's Then when England asked Germany herself to suggest some 
position method of mediation for the preservation of peace, she had 

nothing to suggest. She simply reaffirmed her position that the 
whole matter concerned merely Austria and Serbia. She was willing 
to appeal and did appeal to Russia to keep out, to refrain from mobi- 



GERMANY'S ULTIMATUM TO RUSSIA 685 

lizing, but her appeal was always based on this thesis that the quarrel 
did not concern Russia, but did concern simply Austria and Serbia, 
a point of view which, naturally, Russia did not and could not share. 
Germany was ready to cooperate with other powers in bringing 
pressure to bear upon Russia, but not upon her ally Austria, who had 
begun the whole trouble and to whom she gave a free hand in her 
procedure toward Serbia. 

The attitudes of Germany and Russia were irreconcilable. Ger- 
many held that Russia should allow Austria entire liberty of action. 
Russia believed that Austria's uncompromising and violent Russia 
procedure demanded a Russian mobilization "directed solely mobilizes 
against Austria-Hungary" as the only method that might Austria- 
cause that country to moderate her procedure and induce her Hungary 
to recognize the rights of others. If Russia remained inactive, then 
Austria would do what she liked with Serbia. Russia emphatically 
claimed the right to be consulted in the settlement of Balkan matters. 
Austria had mobilized and on July 28 had begun a war upon Serbia. 
Russia accordingly mobilized against Austria. Germany considered 
this action a menace to herself, and on July ^i sent an ^ 

■> ■> ^ Germany's 

ultimatum to Russia demanding that Russia begin to de- ultimatum 
mobilize her army within twelve hours : otherwise Germany *° ^"^sia 
would mobilize. As Russia did not reply to this peremptory demand, 
German}^ on August i , declared that a state of war existed between 
Russia and Germany. The German declaration of war against 
Russia necessaril}^ meant war with France as well, because of the 
Dual Alliance. 

We have seen that this Dual Alliance was the inevitable outcome 
of the existence and power of the Triple Alliance, concluded between 
Germanv, Austria, and Italy in 1882. The Dual Alliance „,. „ , 

. -^ The Dual 

grew out of the need which both Russia and France felt, of and Triple 
outside support in the presence of so powerful a combination. ■'^'•^'''^^^ 
If there was to be anything like a balance of power in Europe, 
Russia and France must combine. Both alliances were defensive. 
The action of Austria against Serbia brought Russia upon the scene. 
Russia's action brought Germany forward. Germany's action 
necessitated action on the part of France. 

One state was free to act as it saw fit, its conduct not controlled 
by any entangling alliance, England. The Triple and Dual Al- 
liances rested on definite treaties, neither of which had been made 



686 THE WORLD WAR 

public, and imposed obligations upon the contracting parties. 

There had in recent years also grown up what was called the Triple 

The Triple Entente. The commercial rivalry of Germany and England, 

Entente during the past fifteen or twenty years, expressing itself 

in a struggle for markets, in colonial competitions, in a striking 

development of naval power, had been an outstanding fact in recent 

European history. Great Britain, seeing that her policy of isolation 

was possibly becoming dangerous with so active and successful a rival 

in the field, sought, in the first decade of the twentieth century, 

to settle long-continued misunderstandings with France and Russia, 

This she did by a treaty with France in 1904 and with Russia in 1907. 

These agreements settled certain problems and provided certain 

measures in common, the former in Africa, the latter in Asia. During 

„ ^ . , succeeding diplomatic crises the three powers worked in sub- 

The Triple or- r- 

Entente not stantial harmony. But the Triple Entente was not an alliance : 
an aUiance ^^ ^^^ simply a diplomatic group that might be found working 
together when the interests of its members happened to coincide. 
There was no actual alliance between Great Britain and France 
and there was no understanding of any kind between Great Britain 
and Russia, with regard to any European policy or contingency. 
When the crisis of 1914 arose Great Britain was free to act as she 
chose, in the light of what she considered her interests. The diplo- 
matic correspondence shows that this was understood in Berlin and 
V^ienna as it was understood in Paris and St. Petersburg. 

But while Great Britain had no alliances that necessarily involved 
her in the present war, yet as a European power, and as a great, 
imperial, colonial state, she had many and important interests 
of Grear foi" which she must care. It was for her interest that there 
Britain should be no European war and it was also for the interest of 

Europe and the world. The negotiations of that week in 
July, from the issuance of the ultimatum to Serbia to the declarations 
of war, abundantly demonstrate that she made earnest, repeated, 
and varied efforts to bring about a peaceful solution of the problems 
that had been so suddenly thrust forward. She was wedded to no 
particular scheme or formula and invited Germany to make sugges- 
tions that might effect the adjustment, if dissatisfied with hers. 
But despite her efforts a war had come involving at least four large 
states, Austria, Russia, Germany, and France, and one small state, 
Serbia. Would the conflagration spread ? What would England do ? 



THE ATTACK ON BELGIUM 687 

It was certainly not for her interest that France should be con- 
quered by Germany, as that would reduce France to the position 
of a satellite and would immensely augment the power and ^. . . 
prestige of Germany. Moreover, England was bound in of England 
honor to prevent any attack upon the Atlantic seacoast of ^°*^ France 
France, as, since 1912, she had had a naval agreement with France 
whereby the French fleet was concentrated in the Mediterranean in 
order that England might keep larger naval forces in the home waters. 
It seems probable that England would have been drawn into the war 
necessarily if France was attacked, which was, of course, the purpose 
of Germany. But her participation was rendered inevitable by 
Germany's attack upon Belgium. * 

Three of the small states of Europe, Belgium, Luxemburg, and 
Switzerland, had been by international agreements declared neutral 
territory forever. By these agreements the countries con- ^ . 
cerned should never make war, nor should they ever be at- a neutralized 
tacked. The powers that signed the treaties bound them- ^'**^ 
selves to respect and preserve that neutrality. The treaty guar- 
anteeing the neutralization of Belgium was signed by England. 







flrlUcia 


J-77 


U--t'^-i^V 


l-^J,., 




JcX. /J<:L^iM^£.. ^ 4j<X<^ ^f 






^(ixdv T ir, u 


TV^ /yr>MJ2-/w t<,«_ 


lUJ: 


L.'^A^yit 


t'U'i*,^/ 


./ 


^/KM^A£^(ta!^«- 


i.'.axiA- 


rLCA-^^urC . . cZ£l JAn\. ^t/cce, ti. 


ir^z£-nT'r 


ce'^- s-fut-j i-vji. 


ii^«,'i'raMy(i-- 


e^^^A^e■nr truy Cu a<xMrey 


2t^h 









Facsimile of Article VII of the Treaty of 1839, Which Guaranteed the 
Indepexdence and Perpetual Neutrality of Belgium 

France, Prussia, Austria, and Russia. For over eighty years that 
obligation had been scrupulously observed. Now, on August 2, 
Germany sent an ultimatum to Belgium, demanding that ^ 
she allow the German armies to cross her territory, promising ultimatum 
to evacuate it after peace was concluded, and stating that, if *° Belgium 
she refused, her fate would be determined by the fortunes of war. 
Belgium replied that she had always been faithful to her international 
obligations, that the attack upon her independence would constitute 



688 THE WORLD WAR 

a flagrant violation of international law, that she would not sacrifice 
her honor and at the same time be recreant to her duty toward 
Europe, but that her army would resist the invader to the utmost of 
its ability. 

As Austria's ultimatum of July 23 meant the annihilation of the 
independence of one small state, Serbia, Germany's ultimatum of 
August 2 meant the annihilation of the independence of another 
small state, Belgium. Germany's action was the baser and the 
more dishonorable, as she had promised to respect the neutrality 
of the country which she was now about to destroy. 

GERMANY VIOLATES NEUTR.ALITY OF BELGIUM 

The reason for this action was that the easiest way for German 
armies to get into France was over Belgian soil. Germany intended 
to crush France as rapidly as possible, then to turn upon Russia and 
crush her. The invasion of France direct from Germany would 
necessarily be slower, if possible at all, as that frontier was 
statement of Strongly fortified. The official statement of the Chancellor, 
ch ^^',?^*° Bethmann-Hollweg, made in the Reichstag on August 4, 
declared that Germany was acting in self-defense : "Necessity 
knows no law. Our troops have occupied Luxemburg and have 
perhaps already entered on Belgian soil. Gentlemen, this is a 
breach of international law. The French Government has, it is true, 
notified Brussels that it would respect the neutrality of Belgium as 
long as the enemy respected it. But we Icnow that France stood 
ready for an invasion. France could wait, we could not. A French 
attack upon our flank in the lower Rhine might have been disastrous. 
Thus we have been obliged to ignore the just protests of the Govern- 
ments of Luxemburg and Belgium. The injustice, I speak frankly, 
the injustice that we are committing we will endeavor to make good 
as soon as our military aims have been attained. Anybody who is 
threatened as we are threatened and is fighting for his highest pos- 
sessions can think only of one thing, how he is to hack his way 
through." Thus the official, authoritative spokesmari of Germany 
pronounced her own act unjust, thereby proclaiming the faithfulness 
of Belgium to all her obligations, admitted that Germany was doing 
Belgium a wrong, and that the action was in defiance of the law of 
nations. It was justified by necessity, he said. 



SEVEN NATIONS AT WAR 689 

A nation of sixty-five millions attacked a nation of seven millions, 
whose neutrality it had sworn to maintain, because, as the German 
Secretary of State, Jagow, said on that same August 4, with ^j^^ 
frankness, "they had to advance into France by the quickest statement of 
and easiest way, so as to be able to get well ahead with their ^°°^ Jagow 
operations and endeavor to strike some decisive blow as early as 
possible. It was a matter of life and death for them." 

ENGLAND ENTERS THE WAR 

England could correctly assert that she had worked for peace 
"up to the last moment, and beyond the last moment." Now she 
entered the war because she had vital interests in the independ- „ . 
ence of Belgium, and because of her explicit treaty obligations, keeps her 
For hundreds of years her policy had been to prevent the p"^"™*^® 
control of those coasts from being a menace to her own coast across 
the narrow channel as they would be in the hands of a strong military 
power. Over this question England had fought or acted repeatedly 
for centuries against the Spaniards, against the French ; now it 
was to be against the Germans. That in protecting her vital in- 
terests she would also be keeping her solemn promises and defending 
a small and peaceful state against the wanton aggression of a ruthless 
and mighty military power, engaged, according to its own admission, 
in a flagrant violation of the law of nations, was to her vast moral 
advantage in securing the spontaneous sympathy and support of her 
own people and widespread approval beyond her borders. 

On the 23d of July, 1914, there was a dull midsummer peace in 
Europe. By August 4 seven nations were at war. The responsibility 
for this tragic, monstrous, unnecessary crime against civilization, 
against humanity, was lightly assumed. The situation was created 
by the authorized heads of various states. Any power that in that 
crisis showed a willingness to delay, to negotiate, to confer, was 
v/orking in the interest of peace. Any power that declined to do 
this, that adopted a peremptory attitude, that issued ultimatums 
with incredibly short time limits, hastened the appalling entangle- 
ment and was ready for war, whether it desired or intended it or not. 

The opinion of the outside world as to where that responsibility 
lies has been overwhelmingly expressed. That opinion was shared 
by a state that had for thirty-two years been the ally of Austria and 



690 THE WORLD WAR 

Germany and was an ally in August, 19 14. When asked on August 

I, by the German ambassador, what were Italy's intentions, the 

T,, „ . . Italian Government replied through its Minister of Foreign 

Ine opinion r- o o 

of neutral Affairs that "as the war undertaken by Austria was aggressive 
nations ^^^ ^-^ ^^^ ^^jj within the purely defensive character of the 

Triple Alliance, particularly in view of the consequences which might 
result from it according to the declaration of the German Ambas- 
sador, Italy would not be able to take part in the war." 



THE WAR IN 1914 

Austria's determination to wreak her wrath upon Serbia, to 
punish, humiliate, and master that small but independent and 
successful state, had led straight, and with incredible swiftness, to an 
appalling issue. Five great nations, Austria-Hungary, Germany, 
Russia, France, and England, and two small nations, Serbia and 
Belgium, had passed, within a space of twelve momentous days, from 
a state of peace to one of war. From the Ural Mountains to the 
Atlantic Ocean, from the North Sea to the Mediterranean, hundreds 
of millions of men found themselves caught in the meshes of a gigantic 
conflict, whose cost in human life and happiness and treasure must 
inevitably be tremendous. The world was stunned by the criminal 
levity with which Austria-Hungary and Germany had created this 
hideous situation. 

The sinister and brutal challenge was, however, accepted imme- 
diately and with iron resolution by those who had done their utmost 
during those twelve days to avert the catastrophe, and not only great 
powers like France and England, but small ones, like Belgium and 
Serbia, never hesitated, but resolved to do or die. That the contest 
was not merely a material one, but that the most precious moral and 
spiritual interests were involved, was clearly seen and stated at the 
very beginning of the war by the responsible statesmen of France 
. and England. In those early days Mr. Asquith, prime minister 

stated by of Great Britain, expressed the common resolution of the west- 
Asquith gj.j^ powers when he declared: "We shall never shea the. the 

sword which we have not lightly drawn until Belgium recovers in full 
measure all and more than all that she has sacrificed, until France 
is adequately secured against the menace of aggression, until the 
rights of the smaller nationalities of Europe are placed upon an 



THE RESISTANCE OF BELGIUM 



691 



unassailable foundation, and until the military domination of Prussia 
is wholly and finally destroyed." A cause dedicated to such aims 
as those was worth}'' of the supreme sacrifice it would pitilessly 
exact. 

\Miy these references to Belgium and France? Because, in the 
military plans of Germany, these two were to be overrun and 
conquered first, then Russia, and then the dominance of Europe 

by Germany would be 
achieved and rendered 
unassailable. After that 
let the world look out. 
It would receive its orders 
from Berlin and it would 
know full well the mean- 
ing of disobedience. 

Germany had de- 
manded free passage for 
her troops through The spirit of 
Belgium. King Belgium 
Albert, one of the un- 
sullied heroes of a war 
rich in heroes, had at that 
critical moment embodied 
the spirit of his people 
and had added luster to 
the name of Belgium for- 
ever when, in reply to the 
arrogant demand, he an- 
nounced that "the Bel- 
gian Government is firmly 
resolved to repel with all 
the means in its power every attack upon its rights." Then the 
thunder-cloud broke. The mighty German army burst upon the 
land, resolved to get to Paris by the shortest route, the valley of the 
Meuse (miiz). The fortress of Liege (lyazh) stood in the way. It 
was bombarded by powerful artillery and forced to surrender on 
August 7. Brussels was occupied on August 20. But the fall of 
Liege did not clear the route to France. Namur stood in the way 
and here the Belgians were aided by the French, and by the British, 




King Ai,bi;rt I 
From a photograph by Collings, London. 



692 THE WORLD WAR 

hurrying to the scene their "contemptible httle army," as the Kaiser 
is said to have called it. Namur was occupied on August 22. 
Mons (mohs) was next attacked and the French and English were 
compelled to begin a retreat. Withdraw they must or the German 
armies would envelop them and a disaster like that of Sedan in 
1870 might result. The great retreat from Mons southward con- 
tinued day after day, night after night, rapid, harrowing, critical, 
incessant, annihilation constantly threatening. City after city in 
northern France fell into the hands of the Germans, who advanced 
to within fifteen miles of Paris. The government of France was re- 
moved to Bordeaux. The completion of German victory seemed 
at hand. August was a month of gloom for the Allies. 

Then General Joffre, commander of the French armies, issued his 
famous order, stating that the retreat was over. To his generals he 
sent this message : "The hour has come to hold fast and to let your- 
selves be killed rather than to yield." And to the army Joffre issued 
this : "At the moment when we are about to engage in battle it is 
imperative that every one should remember that the time has passed 
for looking backward ; every effort must be devoted to attacking and 
repulsing the enemy. Troops that can no longer advance must, at 
all cost, keep the ground they have won and be shot down where 
they stand rather than retreat. In the present circumstances no 
weakness can be tolerated." 



THE BATTLE OF THE MARNE 

The decisive moment had arrived. There was no faltering, but the 
whole French army was nerved to supreme efifort. From September 5 
to September 10, along a line of more than a hundred miles from 
Paris to Verdun, raged the famous Battle of the Marne, one of the 
decisive battles of the world's history. The spirit in which these 
men fought was typified in General Foch, one of Joffre's subordinates, 
who at a critical moment telegraphed to his chief: "My right is in 
retreat ; my center is yielding. Situation excellent, I shall attack." 
And attack he did, with great success. 

The Germans were defeated. Their terrific, crushing blow, in- 
tended to eliminate the French from the war, had failed. They 
retired as precipitately as they had advanced, the French at their 
heels. Only when they were across the Aisne and in trenches already 



CONQUEST OF BELGIUM 



693 



prepared for them were they safe. At the Battle of the Marne 
France had savecf herself and Europe and the world. 

After the Battle of the Marne the Allies sought to break through 
the German lines along the Aisne but were unsuccessful. Thereupon 
there ensued a race to the sea, an extension of the trenches north- 
ward to the English Channel. The Germans overran the western 

part of Belgium, seized 
Antwerp (October 10) and 
Ostend and tried to get 
to Dunkirk and Calais, conquest of 
but were arrested at Belgium 
the Yser River. By the end 
of October the opposing 
sides were entrenched against 
each other all the way from 
Nieuport to Switzerland. 
The "war of positions," 
which was to last with only 
minor changes down to 
March, 191 8, had begun. 

As the result of all these 
events the Germans were in 
possession of a large area of 
northeastern France and of 
nearly all of Belgium. The 
possession of this territory 
greatly augmented their 
power to make war, for it 
carried with it ninety per 
cent of the iron ore of France, 
and fifty per cent of the coal of France, and the harbors of the 
Belgian coast became favorable bases for the submarine warfare 
adopted later. 

The Germans had not only won great and rich territories in a two 
months' campaign : they had also won undying hatred and a moral 
loathing so general and so intense that it is hard, if not impossible, 
to find its equal in human history. From the moment they Belgian 
stepped upon Belgian territory they trampled under foot all atrocities 
considerations of humanity, of decency, of honor. No savage ever 




Plwlo bu Central .Wews Photo Service, X. Y. 

Marshal Joffre 



694 



THE WORLD WAR 




THE BELGIAN ATROCITIES 695 

tortured a helpless victim with a greater display of heartlessness and 
cruelty than Germany showed in her treatment of Belgium. Not only 
were conscienceless pillage and systematic looting the order of the day, 
not only were towns and cities fined and mulcted of enormous sums of 
money, not only were villages fired, not only were works of art and 
public monuments destroyed, but great numbers of civilians, men, 
women, and little children, were murdered in cold blood or subjected 
to treatment worse than death. The Germans killed prisoners, 
they poisoned wells, they bombarded undefended towns and hospitals. 
It is no wonder that Belgium's most distinguished poet and man of 
letters, Maurice iVIaeterlinck, called the German "the foulest invader 
that the world has ever borne." A prosperous and peaceful people 
was ruined, and threatened with starvation from which it was only 
saved by the charity of the world. The martyrdom of Belgium 
is the deep damnation of modern imperial and militaristic Germany. 
The multitudinous seas would not suffice to wash out the abysmal 
guilt. 

Such was the course of events in western Europe after the fateful 
August 4, 1914. Meanwhile events were occurring in the east and 
the southeast. Russia, mobilizing far more rapidly than the R^ggia^ j^, 
Germans had supposed she could, invaded Eastern Prussia vasion of 
about the middle of August, gaining several victories. The ^"""^"y 
Germans were forced to withdraw some of their troops from the west- 
ern front to meet this unexpected menace, and this contributed to the 
German defeat at the Marne. The victories of the Russians were 
short-lived, for under the command of General von Hindenburg the 
Germans defeated them disastrously in the Battle of Tannenberg 
(August 26-September I, 1 9 14). Hindenburg was henceforth the 
idol of Germany. A legend of invincibility began to grow up about 
his name. 

The Russians were more successful against Austria. Invading the 
Austrian province of Galicia they captured Tamopol and Lemberg 
and Jaroslav and began the siege of Przemj^sl (pzhem'isi), which sur- 
rendered in March, 1915. An invasion of Hungary was intended 
as the next step. 

As Austria was thus fully occupied with Russia, the Serbians were 
able to expel the Austrian armies which had invaded their country 
(December, 19 14). They crowned their successes by retaking their 
capital, Belgrade. 



696 THE WORLD WAR 

TURKEY ENTERS THE WAR 

Other events of those months of 1914, which must be chronicled, 
are : the entrance of little Montenegro into the war out of sympathy 
for Serbia, the Montenegrins being Serbians by race (August 7) ; and 
the entrance of Turkey into the war on the side of the Central Powers 
(November 3). The latter was an event of considerable importance. 
Though European Turkey had been greatly reduced as a result of 
the Balkan Wars, the Ottoman Empire was still extensive, including 
Asia Minor, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine, and Arabia, 
in all over seven hundred thousand square miles, or an area more 
than three times as large as the German Empire, and with a popula- 
tion estimated at twenty-one millions. Its capital, Constantinople, 
was a city of over a million inhabitants, and its location incomparable, 
lying, as it does, at the point where Europe and Asia meet, and 
barring the entrance to and the exit from the Black Sea, that is from 
southern Russia. The Sultan ruled over a most motley collection of 
peoples, over Turks, a minority of the whole population, and over 
Arabs, Greeks, Syrians, Kurds, Circassians, Armenians, Jews, and 
numerous other races. The only unity that these races knew was to 
be found in the oppression the^^ all experienced from their govern- 
The relation ^i^nt, which was an unrestrained tj^anny. The government 
of Germany was Strongly pro-Gcrman. Enver Pasha was minister of war, 
an ur ey ^ man who had been a military attache in Berlin, and had 
formed the most intimate relations with the Germany military 
circles. During most of his reign the Emperor of Germany had 
striven successfully to build up German influence in Turkey and by 
1914 Turkey was the willing and eager tool of Germany, her army 
largely officered by Germans. The expected therefore occurred 
when the Turkish Government permitted two German warships to 
enter the Bosporus, whence they sailed into the Black Sea and bom- 
barded Russian ports. Russia thereupon declared war upon Turkey, 
November 3, 1914, and England and France immediately did the 
same. 

Turkey's entrance into the war was intended to be and was a threat 
at the Balkan states and at the British Empire, that is at India and 
Egypt. It involved Asia and Africa in the war, Mesopotamia, Syria, 
Palestine, Egypt. An immediate consequence was the dethronement 
of the Khedive of Egypt, who was plotting with the Sultan to expel 



JAPAN DECLARES WAR UPON GERMANY 697 

the British. Great Britain declared Egypt a protectorate of the 
British Empire and appointed the uncle of the dethroned Khedive 
in his place,, with the title of Sultan. Turkish attempts to invade 
Egypt and get control of the Suez Canal, thus cutting England's 
connection with India, were frustrated early in the following year 
(February, 191 5). 

JAPAN ENTERS THE WAR 

Still another power entered the war almost at the beginning, Japan 
(August 23, 1914). Japan had two reasons for participating. One 
was loyalty to her alliance with Great Britain which, concluded 
originally in 1902, had been renewed in 1905 and 191 1. That treaty 
had been of the greatest service to Japan, increasing her international 
prestige and guaranteeing her territorial rights. It was a defensive 
alliance, each side promising the other support in certain con- 
tingencies in case of war. 

Such a case having arisen, England now applied to Japan for assist- 
ance in protecting her trade in the East, and Japan loyally responded. 
But that protection could not be secured as long as Germany held her 
strong naval base at Kiauchau (ki-ao-chou')- The Japanese knew 
how Germany had acquired that base, seventeen j'^ears before, after 
having in conjunction with Russia and France forced Japan to re- 
linquish the fruits of her victory in her war with China. ^ They 
therefore took pleasure in requiting this injury and in expressing their 
demand in the same language that Germany had used to them twenty 
years before. On August 17, 1914, an ultimatum was issued by Japan 
to Germany demanding that she withdraw her fleet and surrender 
Kiauchau as necessary "to the peace of the Far East" and requesting 
an answer by August 23. Germany sent no answer to this ultima- 
tum, but the Kaiser telegraphed to Kiauchau : "It would shame me 
more to surrender Kiauchau to the Japanese than Berlin to the 
Russians." On August 23, war was declared by Japan against 
Germany, and by the middle of November she had conquered the 
German colony. From that time on until 191 8 her participation 
in the war was slight. She was, however, one of the Allies, having 
agreed with England, France, and Russia not to make a separate 
peace. 

* See above, pp. 647-648. 



698 THE WORLD WAR 

ENGLAND CONTROLS THE SEAS 

Meanwhile another aspect of the war was being played upon the 
high seas. The immense importance to the Allies of the naval pre- 
ponderance of Great Britain was shown from the first days of the war 
and was made each day increasingly apparent. The British won 
a naval victory near Helgoland in August, the Germans won a naval 
victory ofif the coast of Chili in November, which was avenged by 
Control of England in a complete defeat of a German fleet off the Falkland 
the seas Islands (December 8). The total result of these events was 

the sweeping of German naval vessels from the high seas and the 
bottling up of the main German fleet in the Kiel Canal ; also the 
sweeping of German merchant shipping from the ocean. Now and 
then a German raider might still get out and do damage. The 
submarine danger was as yet not serious. Owing to Great Britain's 
practical control of the great water routes of communication the 
transport of troops to the scene of battle from England, Canada, 
Australia, South Africa, and the transport of munitions and mer- 
chandise, and the exchanges of commerce, could go on, in the main, 
unimpeded. The importance of this fact cannot be exaggerated. 
It enabled the Allies vigorously to prosecute the war, and it kept 
industrial and commercial life active, a source not only of comfort 
and convenience, but of wealth, and wealth was necessary to the 
maintenance in full and increasing vigor of armies and navies and 
all the various war services. 

Thus we see how crowded with decisive events were those months 
from August to December, 1914. The flame so lightly and joyously 
ignited by Austria and by Germany was spreading rapidly and por- 
tentously. By the end of that year ten nations were at war, Austria- 
Hungary, Germany, and Turkey on the one side, Serbia, Russia, 
France, Belgium, Great Britain, Montenegro, and Japan on the other. 
Two great nations, the United States and Italy, and many small ones, 
had declared their neutrality. Whether they would be able to main- 
tain it, in a war which, as was already clear, affected every nation, not 
only in its economic life, but in its intellectual, moral, and spiritual 
outlook, remained to be seen. 

The year 19 14 closed with the Allies holding the Germans on 
the western front, having defeated them at the Battle of the 
Marne. 



THE BATTLE OF NEUVE CHAPELLE 699 

THE WAR IN 191 S 

The Germans had conquered all but a small section of Belgium, 
had conquered northeastern France, and had dug themselves in from 
the North Sea to Switzerland. Attempts on the part of the Allies 
to dislodge them and to break through the line were made repeatedly 
in 191 5. At the Battle of Neuve Chapelle the English under Sir 
John French attacked over a front of a little more than four , 

miles. The attack was preceded by the most terrific artillery Neuve 
engagement ever known in warfare. On that narrow front '^^p®"® 
more than three hundred British cannon opened fire on March 10. 
After they had prepared the way the infantry pressed forward, gaining 
a mile. On the two following days the Germans delivered repeated 
counter-attacks but without success. The British held their new 
front but the casualties were extremely heavy. A mere local dent 
had been made in the German line. The battle was important as 
showing sharply how tremendous must be the effort and the sacrifice 
if the Germans were to be driven out of France and Belgium. 
Both England and Germany lost more in killed, wounded, and 
captured than the English and Prussians had lost in the Battle of 
Waterloo. 

From April 22 to April 26 occurred a similar battle on a narrow 
front, this time begun by the Germans. Here gas w^as used for the 
first time. The French line collapsed. Those who survived Battle of 
the gas retreated three miles. The battle is famous for this ^p"^ 
new feature of warfare, and for the remarkable coolness, heroism, 
and spirit of sacrifice of the Canadians. "On the Canadians the 
storm broke with its full force and Canadian militia repeated the 
glories of British regulars from Mons to the Marne. In British 
imperial history the Second Battle of Ypres (e'pr) will be memorable." 
But it broke no line and like the battle of Neuve Chapelle it was 
mere "nibbling," a word that now passed into current use to describe 
the character of the fighting. 

All through the summer of 191 5 there was only desultory fighting 
on the western front, broken by special attempts to break the line 
which would not break. One incident of importance was the reliev- 
ing of Sir John French and the appointment of General Haig as 
commander in chief of the British armies. The issue was to prove 
that England had at last found her leader. 



700 THE WORLD WAR 

GERMANY INVADES RUSSIA 

Other disappointments were reserved for the Alhes during that 
bitter year of 1915. Germany's original plan of campaign had been, 
as we have seen, first to crush France and to eliminate her from the 
war, then to turn eastward and eliminate Russia, after which she 
would dictate whatever peace she chose to Europe. The Battle of the 
Marne and the solid line of the French and English from Nieuport in 
Belgium to Switzerland had blocked .this plan. France was not 
The eastern easily to be eliminated. Therefore the Germans adopted a 
front j^g^ plan, namely, to crush and eliminate Russia, then to turn 

westward, settle accounts with France and bring England to her 
knees. Of course while attending to their eastern enemy, they must 
hold their western front tight, and even attack, if the opportunity 
offered. There must be no suspension or relaxation of effort any- 
where, but the main emphasis must be put upon the eastern cam- 
paign, as it was the more inviting and promised the more immediate 
gains. There was an additional argument in favor of making the 
main effort in the east. Hindenburg, the new idol of Germany, 
from long years of study was minutely acquainted with all the natural 
features of that theater of war. What he had done at Tannenberg 
he could do again, and again, perhaps. 

Therefore eastward the path of empire took its way. The develop- 
ments there were destined to exceed the wildest imagination of the 
Germans. After Tannenberg the Russians, recovering, resumed the 
offensive, and again invaded East Prussia, whereupon Hindenburg 
fell upon them, administering a crushing defeat in the Battle of the 
Mazurian Lakes (February 12, 1915). The Russians lost in killed 
and wounded a hundred and fifty thousand and a hundred thousand 
of them were taken prisoners. 

This was a mere beginning. East Prussia was freed from the pres- 
ence of the Russians. But they had overrun Galicia, a northern 
province of Austria. They must be expelled and then no for- 

German in- '^ ^ 

vasionof eign soldicrs would stand on the soil of the Central Empires. 

Russia Moreover the war should be carried straight over into Russia. 

The tables must be turned, and turned they were in a memorable 
fashion. All through the summer, from April to August, a mam- 
moth drive of Germans and Austrians combined, under Hindenburg 
and Mackensen, went on over a wide front. Victory followed 



THE EASTERN FRONT 



701 




702 THE WORLD WAR 

victory in rapid succession. The Russians were driven out of Galicia. 
Przem}'sl fell on June 2 ; Lemberg on June 22. Russian Poland was 
invaded. Warsaw, its capital, was captured on August 5. All 
of Poland was conquered and Lithuania and Courland were overrun. 
When the campaign was over the Russian line was still intact, but 
it had been forced far back and now ran from Riga, in the north, to 
Czernowitz, in the south, near the northern border of Roumania. 

It was a notable summer's work. Mackensen took his place beside 
Hindenburg, as a national hero. The process of Russian. disintegra- 
f. tion which two years later was to lead to the shameful Treaty 

conquest of of Brest-Litovsk had begun. Russia had lost 65,000 sc^uare 
miles of territory, a territory larger than New England. 
The military statistics of this war are uncertain, being subject to no 
control outside official circles, but it is said that Russian losses in 
killed and wounded were a million two hundred thousand and nearly 
a million in prisoners. The Russian commander. Grand Duke 
Nicholas, was removed from chief command and sent to the Cau- 
casus. So much for the eastern front. As 19 14 had seen the 
Germans seizing Belgium and northern and eastern France, 191 5 
had seen them seizing a large part of Russia. The Germans were 
entitled to the elation which they experienced and which they volubly 
expressed. 

THE GALLIPOLI CAMPAIGN 

The Allies suffered another notable discomfiture during that year 

191 5, and a serious diminution of prestige, this time in the extreme 

im tance Southeastern point of Europe. They attempted the capture 

of this of Constantinople, the capital of the Turkish Empire, an 

campaign extraordinarily difficult thing to do owing to topographical 

reasons. Could they accomplish this, then the Balkan states not 

yet in the war would probably enter it on the side of the Allies, and 

with that alignment Austria could be attacked and invaded from the 

south and east ; also Turkey' might be compelled to sue for peace 

or at any rate would be put on the defensive. And could the Allies 

control the Dardanelles and the Bosporus, they could secure a 

connection with Russia through the Black Sea. They could thus 

send to Russia the war supplies she so greatly needed and could 

receive from her the food supplies she produced. 

In February and March a British and French fleet tried to force the 



<'■''* 



•THE GALLIPOLI CAMPAIGN 703 

Dardanelles. Penetrating the channel as far as the " Narrows," they 
could get no farther. The shores were powerfully fortified, and in the 
battle between the forts and the ships of war, several of the latter were 
destroyed. The fleet was forced to withdraw. Constantinople could 
not be reached that way. Next an attempt was made by land. 
After a costly delay Anglo-French troops, reenforced by troops from 
Australia and New Zealand, called " Anzacs," ^ who had been brought 
up by way of the Red Sea, landed on the peninsula of Gallipoli, Sir 
Ian Hamilton in command. But the Turks had had their warning 
and, under the command of a German general, Liman von Sanders, 
were ready for them. The landing was effected only at a heavy cost 
and the positions which the Allies confronted proved impregnable. 
A flanking movement from Suvla Bay likewise proved unsuccessful. 
The Allies held on all through the year, but they were foiled and 
in December they abandoned the attempt. Their losses had been 
enormous and nothing had been accomplished, save that possibly 
the expedition had kept the Turks from pressing any attack upon 
the Suez Canal. The reaction of this conspicuous and complete 
failure upon the hesitating Balkan states, Bulgaria and Greece, 
was disastrous. They, hitherto neutral, began to think that the 
Central Powers would ultimately be victorious and that it would be 
more prudent as well as pleasanter to be on the winning side. 

BULGARIA JOINS THE CENTRAL , POWERS 

Bulgaria's dislikfe of Serbia, Roumania, and Greece was intense ; 
she resented bitterly the Treaty of Bucharest ^ and only awaited a 
favorable opportunity to tear it up. With the Russians retreating 
week after week and month after month before the terrific onslaughts 
of Hindenburg and Mackensen, with the Turks and Germans blocking 
the straits of the Dardanelles and holding the British tightly to the 
coasts of Gallipoli, it seemed evident to Czar Ferdinand and to his 
minister Radoslavoff that the Germans were the predestined victors 
in this gigantic war. Therefore, after a disreputable display of 
double-dealing, they enlisted Bulgaria on the side of the Central 
Powers (October 4, 191 5). This action of Bulgaria had two imme- 

' A composite word made by the initial letters of the words Australian New Zealand 
Army Corps. 

2 See above, pp. 675-677. 



, 704 THE WORLD WAR 

diate consequences. It linked the Central Powers with Turke}^ 
completing the "corridor" to the East, to Asia. And it sounded the 
doom of Serbia. 

Serbia had been the unwilling pretext of a war which had so soon 
broken all bounds, dragging the world with it toward the abyss. 
Austria's ultimatum to Serbia had been the signal for the general 
melee. Austrian armies had immediately invaded Serbia and had 
seized Belgrade, though only after having encountered a stubborn 
resistance, during which the Serbians had at one moment won a 
brilliant victory (August 20, 19 14, and succeeding days), the first 
general battle on a European front. The Serbians, aided by the 
Montenegrins, fought desperately against the Austrian invasion, 
and by the middle of December their victory was complete. Bel- 
grade was reoccupied on December 15. The Austrians retreated 
precipitately out of the land for which they had had such lordly 
contempt. Their retirement was a rout. Serbia even invaded 
Austria. A Serbian author may be pardoned for writing: "In 
ten days the Serbian victory over five Austrian army corps was 
complete. Since the days when Scipio saved Rome from Hannibal, 
or when England destroyed the might of Spain, the world has never 
seen such a spectacle, and never has victory been more deserved." 
General Misitch was the hero of the Serbian hour. 

Such was the first chapter of Serbian history in the Great W^ar. 
The second was very dififerent. The Germans and Austrians, fresh 
from their successes in Russia and Galicia, invaded Serbia in great 
strength in October, 191 5, under General von Mackensen. At the 
same time the Bulgarians invaded her from the east. For two months 
the Serbians fought single-handed and with unquenchable valor 
Conquest of against the overwhelming forces of Germany, Austria, and Bul- 
Serbia garia, left in the lurch, moreover, by their ally Greece, which 

was by treaty bound to aid them in a contingency like this. Serbia 
was completely conquered and crushed. A remnant only of her 
armies was able to reach safety on the coast of Albania, whence it 
was transported in Allied vessels to the island of Corfu. It is difficult 
to find words adequately to characterize the awful retreat across 
the barren Albanian Mountains, the unspeakable hardships endured. 
The war exacted another martyrdom. The Austro-Germans followed 
up their conquest by overrunning Montenegro (January, 1916). 
Simultaneously with this conquest and extinction of Serbia another 



ITALY ENTERS THE WAR 705 

tr^in of events was being started, whose full significance was not to be 
made manifest until two more eventful and discouraging years had 
passed. In October, 1915, an Anglo-French force landed at Salonica, 
the leading port of Greece. It had come to aid Serbia in response to 
an invitation from the prime minister of Greece, Venizelos. Con- 
stantine, the King of Greece and a brother-in-law of the German Em- 
peror, did not propose to aid Serbia, although by treaty bound to do 
so. He now dismissed Venizelos (va-ne-za'-los) and began a tortuous 
pro-German policy which was ultimately to cost him his throne. 

The Anglo-French army marched northward to help the Serbians, 
but was unsuccessful and had to withdraw behind the lines of Sa- 
lonica. But out of the union of this force, subsequently The lines 
greatly enlarged, with the reorganized and reinvigorated °^ Saionica 
remnant of the Serbian army which had found refuge in the island 
of Corfu, was to emerge in time salvation for the stricken land. 

ITALY JOINS THE ALLIES 

WTiile the situation had, during the year, grown worse for the Allies 
in the East and in the Balkans, there had been a distinct and a 
promising gain for them in another quarter. Italy had entered the 
war on their side. For over thirty years Italy had been a member 
of the Triple Alliance, concluded in 1882, with Germany and Austria- 
Hungary. That alliance she had renewed as late as 191 2 and that 
renewal was to run until 1920. But when the war broke out in 1914 
and when Italy was asked by her allies to cooperate with them, she 
declined on the ground that she was obliged to aid them only if they 
were attacked. Instead of being attacked they had themselves 
begun the war. Italy therefore adopted a policy of neutrality, which 
she maintained until May 23, 1915. Then, at the moment when 
the Russians were in full retreat, she entered the war on the side of the 
Western Powers. This was the great gain of the year for the Allies 
and one that bade fair to redress the balance of power in their favor. 

The Italian Government, in acting thus, was but responding to a 
widespread popular demand. Ever since the Kingdom of Italy had 
been formed in the decade between i8s9 and 1870 the Italians „,^ ^, , 

' Why Italy 

had been restless under the thought that their unification had entered the 
been incomplete, that outside the boundaries of the state as ^*' 
determined at that time there were hundreds of thousands of Italians 



7o6 THE WORLD WAR 

still subject to Austria, in the Trentino to the north, and in Trieste 
and the peninsula of Istria to the northeast. This was Italia Irre- 
denta or Unredeemed Italy. This territory the Italian Government 
now endeavored to acquire, at first peacefully through direct negotia- 
tions with Austria-Hungary, then, that method failing, through war. 
Another motive also influenced the Government, the insistent popular 
demand that Italy do her share in the work of the defense of civiliza- 
tion against Kultur, of democracy and liberty against autocracy and 
despotism. The strong instinct of the Italian people was that they 
belonged with the Allies by reason of the principles they held in 
common with them. Their action in entering the war was naturally 
greeted with enthusiasm in France and England, and with deep 
resentment in Germany and Austria. 

The intervention of Italy was followed shortly by that of the little 
independent republic of San Marino, which declared war upon the 
Central Powers, June 3, 19 15. 

Another Allied gain during 1 9 1 4 and 1 9 1 5 was the conquest of the 

German colonies. Japan seized Kiauchau, as we have seen, soon aft^r 

her entrance into the war. In Africa, British and French troops 

Conquest ^ 

of German easily Overran Togoland and Kamerun. German Southwest 
colonies Africa was conquered by South African troops under General 

Smuts, though the conquest was not completed until early in 1917. 
A campaign against German East Africa was begun early and re- 
sulted in soon freeing that colony of most of the German troops, some 
of whom, however, remained untracked and undefeated, apparently, 
until the end of the war. In the main the vast German colonial 
empire had shrunk to very small proportions by the close of 191 5. 

In the same year, 191 5, occurred an event which shocked the world 

by its wanton and cowardly barbarity and which was in time to have 

The far-reaching consequences, the sinking, on May 7, of the mam- 

"Lusitania" moth Atlantic liner, the Ljisiiania, off the coast of Ireland. 

This incident may best be described later. It should, however, be 

included in this untoward list of events which darkened the year 19 15. 



THE WAR IN 1916 

We have seen that Germany's original plan of war was to crush 
France first and then to turn against Russia and force her to her 
knees. This plan had been attempted in 1 9 1 4, but had not succeeded. 



VERDUN 707 ' 

France had not been crushed but had, in the famous Battle of the 
Marne, defeated the Germans, driving them precipitately back to 
the Aisne, had saved her own field army intact, had saved Paris and 
the most important fortresses of France, Verdun, Belfort, Toul, and 
Epinal. Unconquered and undaunted France was all through ^j^^ ^^^ 
1 91 5 and in 1916 the hope and the mainstay of the world, the map early 
flaming and resolute soul of the Allied cause. After a year ^'^ ''' 
and a half of war Russia had, however, been badly defeated and 
had given many signs of that weakness and disintegration that were 
later to develop so rapidly and appallingly. England was not yet 
fully conscious of the part she must play ; she had not yet brought 
herself to adopt universal military service, although she had ac- 
complished wonders in volunteering. Italy had done little to justify 
the great hopes with which the Allies had greeted her entrance into 
the war. Belgium had been virtually wiped off the map ; so had 
Serbia, Montenegro, and Albania ; all had been overrun by the armies 
of the Central Powers and were securely held. France, however, ^ 
stood defiant and resolute, tense, straining every nerve, steeled for 
every contingency. 

But France had suffered terribly and the German military authori- 
ties believed it was possible to do, in 19 16, what they had failed to 
accomplish in 1914. This is the meaning of V'erdun. The _, ^ 
German General Staff thought that, by delivering one terrific, plan and 
irresistible, deadly blow against the French arrny, they could °^^ 
smash it. Then peace would be in sight, as France would recognize the 
hopelessness of further struggle, the sheer impossibility of ever recover- 
ing Alsace-Lorraine. Verdun was a strong position, but, once taken, 
no equally stout defense could be made between there and Paris. The 
capital would fall and the fall of Paris would certainly mean the 
elimination of France. Incidentally, as the German Crown Prince 
was in command near Verdun, blinding military glory would irradiate 
the person of the heir to the Prussian throne. Could anything be 
more desirable or more appropriate ? 

VERDUN 

On February 21, 1916, at 7.15 in the morning the storm broke upon 
Verdun, a place long famous in the militar}^ annals of France, but des- 
tined now to win a glory beyond compare. _ Never had there been 



7o8 



THE WORLD WAR 



so pulverizing an artillery fire as that which inaugurated this attack. 
The Germans had made enormous preparations, had enormous 
armies and supplies. It seemed humanly impossible to prevent 
them from blasting their way through. But the impossible was done. 
The French disputed every inch of ground, with incredible coolness 
and inexhaustible bravery. Nevertheless they lost position after 
position and in four days of frenzied fighting were driven back four 
miles. Then French reenforcements arrived, hurried thither by 
thousands of motors. And one of Joffre's most brilliant subordinates. 




Photo by Central News Photo Service, N. Y. 

Ruins of What Was Once a Famous Spot in Picturesque Veedun 

Petain, reached the scene and infused new energy into the army of 
defense. Superb and spirit-stirring was Petain's cry to his soldiers : 
"Courage, comrades! We'll get them." 

It is impossible to summarize this battle, for it raged for six 
months, from Februar}^ to October, and was characterized by a multi- 
tude of incidents. The fighting back and forth for critical positions 
continued week after week and month after month. Douaumont 
and Vaux are the names of two subsidiary forts which stand forth 
most conspicuously in the murderous welter of repeated attack and 
counter-attack, of thrust and counter-thrust. The Germans were 
resolved to take Verdun, cost what it might. They were ready to 
pay the price but victory they would have. They paid the price, 



VERDUN 



709 



'i 


mmmm^^*^'- ' 


-1 


r- ■■"^ iiiiiillF^' ' - T^^^^HH 




^ ^^S^KS^^Bj^ 




T ^« 


'9' MP '-'-^ 


Jii ^ .••4 ■ W ^^ 






1 -^ 








1% 




^^ 


>v'.nnv^^B^^^^^^^^^^^^QlV^H 


a 




-■^^*^|^ 


^^^^SSmi0^^^^^ .^.ititimU 






^' "'^ '"' ' 


' "^S^*^ 



Decorations Bestowed on the City of Verdun by France and Her 

Allies 

Top, Russian Cross of St. George. Below, left to right, British Military Cross, 
French Cross of the Legion of Honor, Croix de Guerre, Italian Gold Medal for Military 
Valor. Bottom, left to right, Serbian Gold Medal for Military Bravery, Belgian Cross 
of Leopold, Gold Medal of Monteaegro. 



710 THE WORLD WAR 

in irreparable losses, but victory they did not win. The French 
stiffened, under Retain and later under Nivelle, and with the electri- 
" They shall fying, cry "lis ne passeront pas ! " "They shall not pass ! " they 
not pass ! " baffled the fury of the enemy and at the end pitched him out of 
most of the positions he had won. Verdun did not fall. The military 
reputations of Retain and Nivelle had grown enormously and the latter 
soon succeeded Joffre as commander in chief. The Crown Prince 
did not emerge from this enterprise irradiated with any blinding 
effulgence of glory. His experiences were, however, calculated to 
make him a wiser if not a better man. 



THE BATTLE OF THE SOMME 

The course and outcome of the later phases of the Verdun cam- 
paign were affected by another campaign which was being carried 
on simultaneously in another sector of the long line that ran from 
Belgium through France to Switzerland. This was the Battle of the 
Somme. This was an Anglo-French attack, stretching from Arras 
to some distance south of the Somme River, the English under 
General Haig, the French under Foch, the Germans under Hinden- 
burg, who had been transferred to the west after his great successes 
in the east. England was now striking a new pace, which she was 
to continue and to increase, in participation in the war on land. 
In 1914 she had had only a small regular army of a hundred thousand 
men. This was rapidly increased by volunteering which achieved 
notable proportions but not notable enough. Finally in January, 
19 16, she had adopted conscription for single men, and, in May, for 
married men as well. Thus she now had universal service for all 
between the ages of 18 and 41. She was training the new recruits 
hastily and was increasing her munition supplies enormously. She 
had taken over more and more of the line until she was now manning 
about ninety miles from the sea to the Somme. 

The people of the Allied countries expected that their armies, thus 
enlarged and elaborately equipped, would attempt to break through 
the German lines. The Battle of the Somme was an endeavor to 
bring to an end the long deadlock on the western front. After a 
terrific bombardment, which had by this time become the customary 
prelude to an offensive, the general assault was begun on July i. 
For a few days the Allies made progress, though on the whole very 



BATTLE OF THE SOMME 711 

slowly. The railroad centers, Bapaume and Peronne, were their 
objectives. The German line stiffened and fiercely counter-attacked. 
The battle dragged and the rainy season set in, making it almost 
impossible to move the heavy guns over the muddy roads. While 
both the English and the French took a number of towns and Result of 
considerable bodies of prisoners, they were unable to attain '^® b&Me 
fheir objectives. All through the summer and well into the fall the 
desperate struggle went on, dying down in October. The total 
area won by the Allies was small, about 120 square miles. Nowhere 
had they advanced more than seven miles from their starting point. 
Nevertheless Haig was right when he announced that the campaign 
had been a success for three reasons, namely, because it had relieved 
Verdun ; because, by holding large masses of Germans on the western 
front, it had enabled Russia to win a cons derable victory on the 
eastern front ; and because it had worn down the German strength. 
It was in the second phase of this Battle of the Somme that a new 
and redoubtable engine of war was introduced by the British, power- 
ful armored motor cars, quickly nicknamed "tanks," which could 
cross trenches, break through barbed-wire entanglements, and at 
the same time could scatter a murderous fire all about from the guns 
within. Machine gun fire against them was entirely ineffectual. 
Only when squarely hit by powerful missiles from big cannon were 
the tanks disabled. 

There was also serious fighting during 1916 on the Italian and on 
the Russian fronts. The Austrians, supposing the Russians had 
learned their lesson in the previous year and that they would itaiy 
think twice before again assuming the offensive, left their threatened 
eastern front lightly guarded and prepared to punish the Italians, 
their historic enemy, and now more hated than ever because of their 
"treachery" in breaking the Triple Alliance. In May the Austrians 
began an attack from the Tyrol. Controlling the passes of the Alps, 
they were able to form a large army and to threaten Verona and 
Vicenza. The Italians resisted desperately but lost a large number 
of guns and men. They also lost about two hundred and thirty 
square miles of Italian territory. But the Austrians had weakened 
their eastern front so serioush^ that the Russians were winning 
great victories over them in that theater. This in turn reacted 
upon the Italian campaign by forcing the Austrians to recall many 
troops in order to ward off the new danger. Therefore they were 



712 THE WORLD WAR 

obliged to forego for the time being their dream of breaking into the 
plains of Venetia. 

While the Russians had been forced by Hindenburg and Mackensen 
to make a great retreat in 19 15, they had not been put out of the war 
Brusiioff's and, in June, 1916, they began, under Brusiloff, a new offensive, 
drive ^hjs time between the Pripet Marshes and the Austrian prov- 

ince of Bukowina. Brusiioff's drive was for a while successful and 
netted far larger territorial gains than were made on the western front 
in the Battle of the Somme. Brusiloff was able to push the Austrians 
back from twenty to fifty miles, to take a large number of prisoners 
and to capture many towns and cities, including the important ones 
of Lutsk and Czernowitz. The campaign lasted from June to 
October, but after the first month no great progress was made and 
the offensive gradually wore down and stopped. Russia was far 
from having recovered what she had lost in the previous year. 
Indeed, she recovered practically nothing in the north from the Pripet 
Marshes to the Baltic Sea. 

The interplay of these various campaigns was unmistakable. The 
Somme helped Verdun, the Russian drive helped Italy by freeing her 
of the Austrians and by enabling her to begin an offensive along the 
Isonzo which yielded Gorizia on August 9 and brought her to within 
thirteen miles of coveted Trieste. But while there was this interplay, 
this relieving of pressure in one region by bringing pressure to bear in 
another, the team-work was most imperfect. The desirability of a 
unified command of all the Allied forces had hardly begun to dawn. 
It took the experiences of another year and more to drive that idea 
into the minds of the governing authorities of the various countries 
concerned. 

ROUMANIA ENTERS THE WAR 

The unhappy consequences of the lack of proper coordination in a 
common cause were conspicuously shown in another field in this same 
year of 1916, namely, in Roumania. Roumania entered the war 
on the side of the Allies on August 27, 1916. Her chief motive was 
to assure "the realization of her national unity," by which phrase 
was meant the liberation from Austria-Hungary of the three million 
Roumanians who lived in the eastern section of the Dual Monarchy, 
in Transylvania, and their incorporation in the Kingdom of Rou- 
mania. The principle of nationality was at the basis of Roumania's 



THE CONQUEST OF ROUMANIA 713 

action, the principle that kindred peoples desiring to be united should 
be united. Roumania's declaration of war was naturally warmly- 
applauded by the Allies. It was followed immediately by a Rou- 
manian invasion of Transylvania, which achieved very considerable 
successes. 

But the Germans were resolved to prevent this threatened mutila- 
tion of their ally and also this threatened cutting of the connection 
between the Central Powers and Turkey. Roumanian sue- Roumania 
cess, if unimpeded, would widen out into the Balkans and conquered 
imperil the famous "corridor" through Bulgaria and Serbia. The 
German General Staff determined, therefore, to strike with all 
the force at its command, to deal a blow that should be both swift 
and memorable. Two large armies composed of Germans, Austro- 
Hungarians, Bulgarians, and Turks, and under the command of 
Falkenhayn and Mackensen, were sent against Roumania. They 
conquered the southern part of the kingdom with comparative 
ease and entered Bucharest, the capital, on December 6. What 
was left of the Roumanian army withdrew to the north. J assy 
became the provisional seat of Roumanian government. Peace was 
not concluded until much later, but meanwhile the Central Powers 
controlled most of the territory of Roumania, and exploited its rich 
resources in wheat and oil. The corridor to Constantinople was 
widened rather than cut. From this time forth the German ambi- 
tion to create a Middle Europe, dominated by Germany, became more 
and more pronounced and more and more insistent. 

The Roumanian disaster was due to the immense superiority of 
German resources, equipment, and generalship ; also to the mistakes 
of Roumania. One of these mistakes was the lateness of her decision 
to enter the war. None of the Allies was in a position to help her, 
except Russia, whose conduct was now equivocal. Had Roumania 
declared war in June at the moment of Brusiloff 's great victories, the 
outcome might have been very different. As it was she declared it 
when Brusiloff's drive had been brought to a standstill. This was 
but one more proof of the fact that the Allies must bring about a 
closer adjustment of their efforts, if they were to win. 

One more state entered the European War in 1Q16, Portusral. „ 

* Portugal 

On February 23, Portugal seized the German ships in her enters the ; 
harbors, claiming that the shortage of tonnage created by ^^^ 
Germany's submarine campaign justified the action. Whereupon 



714 



THE WORLD WAR 



o Moscow 

U S S I A 




AFRICA 



I Territory of the Central Empires 
' and Turkey 

I Territory Invaded by Central Powers 

I Railroad to the £ast arul to Africa 
Scale of Miles 



NG CO. INC- H t 



Khartum 



The '' Middle Europe " Scheme 



ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE BRITISH NAVY 715 

Germany declared war upon her, March 9. A few days later it 
was officially announced by the Portuguese minister to the United 
States that "Portugal is drawn into the war as a result of her long- 
standing alliance with England, an alliance that has withstood 
unbroken the strain of five hundred years." This, it is curious to 
note, is a reference to a treaty signed in London on June 16, 1373, 
by which each country pledged itself to assist the other in case of 
war, a treaty quite as legitimate as that of the Triple Alliance, much 
more venerable, and far less injurious to the welfare of Europe. 
During all these centuries the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance has con- 
tinued, frequently reaffirmed, the friendship it was designed to bring 
about still exists, the treaty concluded in 1373 has been broken by 
neither party and is still considered in force. Portugal participated 
in the war by sending an army to France and b}' aiding England in 
Africa. 

THE XA\AL BATTLE OF JUTLAND 

The year 19 16 witnessed also a great naval engagement between 
England and Germany, the Battle of Jutland. England had given 
since the outbreak of the war remarkable evidence of her might upon 
the ocean. The mobilization of her fleet in the opening days was quite 
as noteworthy in its way as the mobilization of the German „ 

-' ■' _ Services of 

army, and as the latter entered forthwith upon a career of the British 
victory, so also did the former. The pressure of the British ^^* 
navy began at once to be felt where it was intended it should be, in 
Germany. A blockade of the German coast was established at the 
very outset, which was destined to be made steadily more effective. 
Germany's merchant shipping was swept from the ocean, the vast 
fabric of her sea-borne commerce collapsed. The British fleet 
prevented Germany from importing such essentials as foodstuffs, 
petroleum, cotton, coffee, rubber, zinc, tin, so necessary in the work 
of war. The blockade was not perfect, as now and then a German 
raider could get through, sure, however, in the end, to be hunted 
down. But the attention of the world, the attention even of England 
herself, was not riveted upon this incessant naval war as it was upon 
the military operations on land. One reason for this was that the 
naval war was silent and unseen, although its effects were most 
important. Another was that the war on land was bitterly contested 
and gave rise to numberless incidents, was a tense, critical, and 



7i6 THE WORLD WAR 

doubtful struggle, while the war on the sea was, generally speaking, 
devoid of incident. England's command of her element was never 
in doubt, and was even challenged only infrequently. Submarines 
could and did do occasional damage, even in one instance sinking 
three English war vessels, and there had been two or three sea fights 
between small fractions of the fleets, Germany winning a victory 
in the early days off Chili, England a far more significant one sub- 
sequently off the Falkland Islands. These events were, however, 
of minor importance. But the main German fleet stuck tightly to 
its base, the harbor of Kiel, and the unremitting, perpetual stress 
of the blockade offered no sensations to a world which was surfeited 
with them as a result of the land warfare. 

But on May 31, 1916, the German High Seas fleet, commanded by 
Admiral von Scheer, steamed forth, and skirted up the western coast 
of Denmark. Sighted by the British scouts under Admiral Beatty, 
about 3.30 in the afternoon, an engagement immediately began, the 
Battle of main British squadron, under Admiral Jellicoe, coming up only 

Jutland later. The battle continued for several hours until darkness 

came on, between eight and nine. It was the greatest naval battle 
since Trafalgar and, in the strength and power of the units engaged, 
undoubtedly the greatest in all history. The result was inconclusive. 
Both sides lost important ships but both claimed to be victorious. 
That the real victor, however, was England was proved by the fact 
that the German fleet was obliged to return to Kiel and did not again 
emerge from that refuge. Britannia still ruled the wave, and it was 
extremely fortunate for the safety of democracy in England, France, 
Italy, and the United States, and for liberty everywhere, that she did. 
Had England rendered no other service than this of making the 
seas safe for freedom and dangerous for despotism, the debt of 
humanity to her would be incalculable. But she was doing far more 
than this. The utterances of her statesmen, like those of France, 
from the first of August, 1914, defined the issues at stake, and set 
forth adequately the appalling gravity of the crisis. Not only were 
those utterances profoundly educative but the}^ were veritable 
trumpet blasts, summoning to action, action, action, in the interest 
of all that men in Western Europe and in America had long held 
most precious. In the darkest hours, and there were many such 
during those first three years, there was no faltering in high places, 
no talk of compromise of right with wrong, no weakening of resolu- 



ENTRANCE OF THE UNITED STATES 717 

tion, no abatement of demand that this world be made safe for 
civiUzed men. It must never be forgotten that the leaders of France 
and England, and the nations they represented, were constant and 
valorous defenders of the New World, as of the Old, that it was their 
heroism and their immeasurable spirit of sacrifice that barred the 
way of a vulgar and conscienceless tyrant toward universal domina- 
tion. Never did men die in a holier cause. And they died in 
enormous numbers, literally by the million. 

ENTRANCE OF THE UNITED STATES INTO THE WAR 

In such a contest as that the United States belonged, body and soul. 
If she was to preserve a shred of self-respect, if she was to maintain 
inviolate the honor of the American name, if she was to safe- America 
guard the elementary rights of American citizens, if she was ^'^^ *^^ '"^^ 
bound in any sense to be her brother's helper in the defense of freedom 
in the world, then she must take her stand shoulder to shoulder with 
the hosts of freemen in Europe who were giving and had long been 
giving the last full measure of devotion to that cause, then she 
must spend her manhood and her wealth freely and without com- 
plaint, as France and England and Belgium and Serbia had done. 

From very early in the war there were Americans who endeavored 
to arouse their country to a sense of its danger and its duty, to per- 
suade it to prepare, to fire it with the resolve to keep the nation's 
'scutcheon clean. Among those who, by their quick and intelligent 
appreciation of the situation, by their courage and activity, rendered 
invaluable service in the campaign of national education were Ex- 
President Roosevelt and General Leonard Wood. 

From August, 1914, to April, 1917, America passed through a 
painful, humiliating, and dangerous experience. Her declaration of 
war was the expression of the wisdom she distilled from that expe- 
rience. Her entrance into the war was the most important event 
of the year 191 7, though not immediately the most important, for 
the collapse of Russia, occurring also in that year, had a quicker and 
more direct bearing upon the military situation. But in the end, if 
America kept the faith, she could tip the scales decisively. 

We entered the war finally because Germany forced us in, because 
she rendered it absolutely impossible for us to stay out unless we 
were the most craven and pigeon-hearted people on the earth. 



7i8 THE WORLD WAR 

Any one who counted on that being the case was entertaining a notion 
for which he could certainly cite no evidence in our previous history. 
How did Germany force us into this war? What specific things 
did she do that could be answered in the end in one way and one 
way only ? 

GERMAN OFFENSES AGAINST AMERICA 

The record is a long one, of offenses to the moral, the intellectual, 
the spiritual, the material interests of America. First, the wanton 
attack upon Serbia, a small state, by two bullies, Austria and Ger- 
many, and the flouting of all suggestions of arbitration or attempts 
to settle international difficulties peacefully, methods in which Amer- 
German ica believed, as had been shown by her own repeated use of 

offenses them, and by her enthusiastic support of the efforts of the two 

Hague Conferences to perfect those methods and to win general 
adhesion to them. Second, the invasion of Belgium and the martyr- 
dom of that country, amid nameless indignities and inhumanities. 
The indignation of America was spontaneous, widespread, and 
intense, nor has it shown any tendency to abate from that day to 
this. The sentiment of horror, thus needlessly aroused, coupled 
with admiration for the brave resistance of the Belgians and sym- 
pathy for their sufferings, contributed powerfully to the creation of 
that state of mind which finally gained expression on April 6, 191 7. 
But the conquest and the inhuman treatment of Belgium were no 
direct infringement of our rights. The national indignation was pro- 
foundly stirred, the national sympathy aroused, but neither the sov- 
ereignty of the Government nor the persons or property of the citizens 
of the United States were affected. These were, however, not long to 
German remain immune from attack. German and Austrian officials, 

plots accredited to our Government and enjoying the hospitality of 

our country, proceeded to use their positions here for the purpose 
of damaging Germany's enemies. They fomented strikes among 
American munition workers and seamen ; they caused bombs to be 
placed on ships carrying munitions of war ; they plotted incendiary 
fires, and conspired to bring about the destruction of ships and 
factories. In 191 5 the ambassador of Austria-Hungary, Dumba, and 
the German military and naval attaches, Papen and Boy-Ed, were 
caught in such activities, and were forced to leave the country. 
Under the supervision of Papen a regular office was maintained to 



GERMAN PLOTS 719 

procure fraudulent passports, by lying and by forgery, for German 
reservists. American territory was used as a base of supplies, and 
military enterprises against Canada and against India were hatched 
by Germans on American soil. These German plots were in gross 
defiance of our position as a neutral and of our sovereignty as an 
independent nation. The German Embassy in Washington was a 
nest of scoundrels, plotting arson, and murder also, since the incen- 
diary fires and explosions cost many innocent lives. 

GERMANY'S SUBINIARINE POLICY 

While the diplomatic representatives of Germany were engaged in 
plotting criminal enterprises against Americans at home, the German 
Government itself had embarked upon a course of procedure that 
inevitably ended in the destruction of American lives and property 
on the high seas. In February, 1915, Germany proclaimed the 
waters around the British Isles "a war zone" and announced that 
enemy ships found within that zone would be sunk without warning. 
Neutrals were expected to keep their ships and citizens out of this 
area. If they did not, the responsibility for what might happen 
would be theirs, not Germany's. 

Such was the announcement of German^^'s submarine policy, a 
polic}' that was to have more momentous consequences than its 
authors imagined. A submarine is a war vessel and as such has a 
perfect right to attack an enemy war vessel without warning and sink 
her if she can. But neither a submarine nor any other war vessel 
has any right, under international law, to sink a merchantman 
belonging to the enemy or belonging to- a neutral, except under 
certain conditions, and one of the conditions is that the persons on 
board, crew and passengers, shall be removed to the ship attacking 
or their lives otherwise absolutely safeguarded. 

President Wilson, six days after the German proclamation, des- 
patched a note to Germany announcing that the United States would 
hold the German Government to "a strict accountability" should any 
American ships be sunk or American lives lost, and that the United 
States would take all steps necessary "to safeguard American lives 
and property and to secure to American citizens the full enjoyment of 
their acknowledged rights on the high seas." 

To this the German Government replied that neutral vessels en- 



720 THE WORLD WAR 

tering the war zone "will themselves bear the responsibility for any- 
unfortunate accidents that may occur. Germany disclaims all 
responsibility for such accidents and their consequences." This 
was a clear announcement that not only did she propose to sink 
enemy merchantmen, but neutral merchantmen as well, were they 
found within the prohibited zone, without removing the passengers 
to safety or even giving them the warning necessary to enable them 
to take to the lifeboats, which, on the high seas, would themselves 
not be places of safety but which at least might perhaps give some 
chance for life. 

On March 28, a British steamer, the Falaba, was torpedoed and one 
American was drowned. On May i, an American ship, the Gulflight, 
The "Falaba" was torpedoed without warning. The vessel managed to 
case remain afloat and was later towed into port, but the captain 

died of heart failure caused by the shock, and two of the crew who 
jumped overboard were drowned. The Government of the United 
States began at once to investigate the case, as here apparently were 
all the elements calling for strict accountability. But before the 
investigation was completed, indeed before a week had passed, the 
case was overshadowed by another, the sinking of the Lusita7iia. 

Germany's ruthless submarine campaign, in force since February, 
had resulted by the first of May in the sinking of over sixty merchant 
ships in the war zone, several of them belonging to neutral nations, 
with a loss of about two hundred and fifty lives, all of them the lives 
of noncombatants. Germany had deliberately adopted a policy 
that involved the killing of as many noncombatants, hitherto pro- 
tected by international law and the usages of warfare among civilized 
nations, as might be necessary to enable her to achieve her ends. 
What she had done on land to hundreds and thousands of peaceful, 
unarmed, non-fighting people in Belgium and France she was now 
ready and resolved to do on the sea. But while she was torpedoing 
many vessels, yet England's commerce went on as before, thousands 
of ships entering and clearing British ports, and Great Britain was 
transporting an army to France without the loss of a single man. 
As the German people had been told that the submarines would 
quickly bring England to her knees and as they were not doing so, 
something spectacular and sensational must be achieved to justify 
the promises and expectations, and to silence criticism or discourage- 
ment at home. Consequently, the largest trans-Atlantic British 



THE "LUSITANIA" 



r2i 



liner still in service was selected for destruction. The world, it 
was believed, would then take notice and people would think twice 
before entering the war zone. On May 7, the Lusitania was The 
torpedoed twice without warning and sank in less than twenty " Lusitania ' 
minutes. Nearly twelve hundred men, women, and children were 
drowned, among them over a hundred Americans. This cold- 
blooded, deliberate murder of innocent noncombatants was the most 




Copyright by Vndcniood <.t- i'ndu ii uud, A'. Y 

The "Lusitania" Leaving New York, May ist, 1915 
Torpedoed by a German submarine six days later. 



brilliant achievement of Germany's submarine campaign and was 
celebrated with enthusiasm in Germany as a great "victory." 
The rest of the world regarded it as both barbarous and cowardly. 
The indignation of Americans at this murder of Americans was 
universal and intense. WTien, three years later, American soldiers 
in France went over the top, in the campaign of 191 8, shouting 
"Lusitania'' at their foes, they were but expressing the deep-seated 
indignation of an outraged people, an indignation and resentment 
which time had done nothing to assuage. 



722 



THE WORLD WAR 



On May 13, President Wilson despatched a message to Germany- 
denouncing this act as a gross violation of international law, demand- 
ing that Germany disavow it and make reparation as "far as repara- 
tion is possible," and declaring that the Government of the United 
States would not "omit any word or any act necessary to the per- 
formance of its sacred duty of maintaining the rights of the United 
States and its citizens and of safeguarding their free exercise and 
enjoyment."' 

Germany replied on May 28, evading the main issues of the Ameri- 
can note and making many assertions that were quickly proved to be 




Photo from Underwood & Underwood, N. Y. 

Bronze Medals Awarded to Men Who Helped Sink the "Lusitania" 



lies. A correspondence ensued between the two governments, in 
which the President repeated his demand for disavowal and all 
possible reparation. In the end Germany offered to pay for the lives 
lost but refused to admit that the sinking of the ship was illegal. 
No agreement was reached between the two nations. No action, 
however, was taken. 

All through 191 5, torpedoing of vessels continued, and several 
Americans were drowned. The Government steadily asserted our 
rights, the German Government evading the fundamental principles 
involved, trying to confuse the issue by raising irrelevant points. 



UNRESTRICTED SUBMARINE WARFARE 723 

On March 24, 1916, occurred another major event m this campaign 
of indiscriminate murder of innocent noncombatants, namely the 
torpedoing without warning of an Enghsh ship, the Sussex, The "Sussex" 
while crossing the English Channel. Two Americans were ^^^^ 
injured and about seventy others, who were on board, were en- 
dangered. President Wilson again protested and declared the 
United States could "have no choice but to sever diplomatic relations 
with the German Empire altogether," unless the German Government 
"should now immediately declare and effect an abandonment of 
its present methods of submarine warfare against passenger and 
freight-carrying vessels." Finally, on May 4, German}^ agreed 
that henceforth merchant vessels should not be sunk without 
warning and without saving human lives, unless these ships should 
attempt to escape or offer resistance. But she appended a condi- 
tion, namely that the United States should compel Great Britain 
to observe international law. If the United States should not 
succeed, then Germany "must reserve to itself complete liberty 
of decision." 

President Wilson accepted the promise and repudiated the con- 
dition on the ground that our plain rights could not be made con- 
tingent by Germany upon what any other power should or should 
not do. To this note Germany sent no reply. 

That the promise was entirely insincere, that it was the intention 
to keep it only as long as it should be convenient, that ruthless sub- 
marine warfare was to be resumed whenever it seemed likely to be 
successful, was admitted later by the German Chancellor, Bethmann- 
Hollweg. Sinkings continued to occur from time to time throughout 
1916, and finally, on January 31, 1917, the mask of hypocrisy and 
duplicity was thrown aside and a policy of unrestricted and ruthless 
submarine warfare was proclaimed. Germany announced „ ^ • ♦ ^ 

'■ ■' Unrestricted 

that beginning the next day, February i, she would prevent submarine 
"in a zone around Great Britain, France, and Italy, and in the ""^^^^^ 
Eastern Mediterranean, all navigation, that of neutrals included. 
... All ships met within that zone will be sunk." The insulting 
concession was made that one American passenger ship per week 
might go to England, if it were first painted in stripes, the breadth 
of which was indicated, and if it carefully followed a route laid down 
by Germany. "Give us two months of this kind of warfare," said 
the German Foreign Secretary, Zimmermann, to Ambassador Gerard, 



THE WORLD WAR 




THE UNITED STATES ENTERS THE WAR 725 

on January 31, "and we shall end the war and make peace within 
three months." 

There was only one answer possible to such a note as this, unless 
the people of the United States were willing to hold their rights and 
liberties subject to the pleasure and interest of Germany. On Febru- 
ary 3, the President severed diplomatic relations with Germany, re- 
called our ambassador and dismissed von Bernstorff. Toward the 
end of the month Secretary Lansing made public an intercepted 
despatch from the German Foreign Secretary, Zimmermann, to the 
German Minister to Mexico, instructing him to propose an alliance 
with Mexico and Japan and war upon the United States, Mexico's 
reward to be the acquisition of the States of Texas, New Mexico, 
and Arizona. In other words, the United States was to be dis- 
membered. 

When, on April 2, 19 17, President Wilson appeared before Congress 
and in an address, which was a scathing arraignment of Germany 
before the world, recommended a declaration of war against war 
this "natural foe to liberty" he had a predestined and enthu- between 

Germany and 

siastic response, for he was but expressing the wishes of the the United 
American. people, who did not intend to have war made upon states 
them indefinitely without their hitting back at the aggressor with 
all the force at their command, and who were resolved to share in the 
enterprise of saving the world from Prussian domination, or, in the 
words of the President, "to vindicate the principles of peace and 
justice in the life of the world, as against selfish and autocratic 
power" and "to make the world safe for democracy." On April 6, 
Congress passed a resolution to the effect "that the state of war 
between the United States and the Imperial German Government 
which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby for- 
mally declared," and it shortly proceeded to pass a series of important 
military, financial, and economic measures designed to enable the 
country to play a worthy part in the great struggle. The United 
States did not declare war upon Austria-Hungary until December 7, 
nor did it then or later declare war upon Bulgaria and Turkey. 
With the two latter diplomatic relations only were broken. 

Thus a war, begun with incredible lightness of heart by Austria-' 
Hungary and Germany upon the banks of the Danube, had expanded 
to include not only most of Europe, but Asia and Africa and now all of 
North America. Canada had been in the war since its beginning and 



726 



THE WORLD WAR 



uta Iha Gvriittamtii mi fta p»«^« ft tit* VsilM 9Mm tat nAtm 



AmftrtM: llierefore l» B 

H-mletd t^ tM SsmX* aisrf ffimM e/ J?»;»w«il9fte«» <|l^ (JWfBi Sla^a 
!>/ Avurtixt U Oeo^fym onmitiM, TtiU the iitato tf wtr imtW(«i (iw rnim) 
St«te* dtij ibe JwiKtritt OmiMB Otmnaawt wht<^ tiM 9tm taMa tlnxt ii{ii>n 
(bo United Shtte* i« Iwwby fosMWyaMlMsi! tis4 ttdit flw fraUtat im. «»tl 
he i» Iwrctiy. auU»»!t«l s»3 «l!«c«ed to eajSoy te tsOM M»»! toil falfltafi. 
forew <rf ih9 tJailoi 8»»(t« sml U» iwi»w«» «f thu Oo»«ioi»»n« to oiwjfWWM 
agtiiiut Itw tmperk) Genmo Qev«n»amt! mi^ to MiH tto (latSlct to a 
«ioM«ftil t^astatttoB nil «( «h« i«Min«ai of the tassittf at* tMt(% )4»iliH *>.<' 
the Coagm* <rf tb* Unlt»ti 8t»t9«. u .pt 

Speaktf of &» Mtma »/ Utta^ttntatltM. 




Photo by Harris dt Ewing. 

America's Declaration of War 



had greatly distinguished herself on many fields. Now came the 

United States, unprepared, save for her navy, which at once began 

other states ^^ pTOve its mettle and its value to our Allies, but potentially 

enter the an immense addition to the fighting ranks, should its enormous 

"^^ and varied resources be developed and properly applied. The 

entrance of the United States into the war was followed by the 



REVOLUTION IN RUSSIA 



i^t 



entrance of the republics of Cuba and Panama on the following day 
(April 7). In June, 19 17, King Constantine of Greece was deposed 
and Greece Joined the Allies July 2. Siam declared war on Germany 
July 22, Liberia on August 4, China on August 14, Brazil on October 
26, and in the same year several Central and South American states 
broke off diplomatic relations with Germany. 

Of more immediate and direct influence upon the course of the war 
than this intervention of the United States, which could only make 
itself greatly felt after a period of preparation, was a series of far- 
reaching and startling occurrences in another quarter. 

REVOLUTION IN RUSSIA 

The most important event of 19 17 was the collapse of Russia and 
its withdrawal from the war. This meant an enormous increase of 
Germany's power and at the same time imposed a new and mighty 
burden upon the Allies, a burden which threatened to be too great for 
them to bear. 

Russia had been badly defeated by Hindenburg in 191 5, and Bru- 
silofif's campaign of 191 6, after important initial successes, had been 
brought to a standstill. The result of these events was to overthrow 
arouse criticism of the government. The belief spread that °* *^^ ^^^"^ 
the old familiar "dark forces" were in control once more, that they 
were using the distresses of the nation for their individual advantage, 
that the court was pro-German, that the Czar was meditating a 
separate peace with Germany. Charges of incompetence and 
dishonesty were made against certain ofifiicials. The leading members 
of the Duma demanded that a responsible ministry be created, a 
demand supported by the army and the people, and that radical 
changes be made in the government in the direction of greater 
efficiency, such as were being made in France and England. In 
February 100,000 workingmen went on strike in Petrograd, and 
25,000 in Moscow. An acute food crisis developed and lawless 
raids on bakeries occurred. When ordered to fire on the mobs some 
of the soldiers refused to do so, an ominous sign. On March 11 the 
Czar dissolved the Duma, wishing to get rid of it. But the Duma 
refused to dissolve. A revolution was in full swing. There was 
considerable street lighting, the police being the particular objects 
of popular wrath. Revolutionary bands captured some important 



728 THE WORLD WAR 

buildings and seized the Prime Minister Golitzin, and a former 
Prime Minister Stiirmer, under suspicion of being involved in pro- 
German intrigues. The Duma now effected a coup d'etat, voting 
to establish a Provisional Government. The Czar was informed of 
this change and required to abdicate. This he did on March 15. 
Thus ended the reign of Nicholas II, the last of the Romanoffs, a 
famil}^ which had ruled in Russia for three hundred years and more. 

THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT 

The Provisional Government was a coalition representing the 
three different parties which had had most to do with bringing about 
this surprising change. Prince Lvoff, the head of the ministry, 
represented the business men and landowners of a liberal type, 
Paul Milyukoff, Minister of Foreign Affairs, long associated with 
Russian reform movements, represented the Constitutional Demo- 
cratic party, and Kerensky represented the third group, namely the 
soldiers and workingmen. Kerensky was a Revolutionary Socialist, 
sympathetic with the popular demand for a juster division of the 
land in the interest of the agricultural masses. The ministry pro- 
ceeded to give back to Finland her constitution, to promise self- 
government and unity to Poland, to endow the Jews with equal 
political, civil, and military rights. On March 31 it abolished the 
death penalty. A general amnesty was proclaimed and exiles in 
large numbers returned from Siberia and were greeted with frenzied 
enthusiasm. The public mood was optimistic and excited. 

Revolutions once successful are difficult to arrest and have a way 
of passing rapidly through several stages, each more radical than its 
predecessor. The Russian Revolution formed no exception to thir 
rule, but rather illustrated it afresh. The period of reasoned liberal- 
ism, of rational and ordered reform, did not last long. The Socialists 
entered aggressively upon the scene, organizing Soviets or councils of 
Rise of the workingmen and soldiers. These Soviets, particularly the one 
Soviets in Petrograd, began to oppose the Provisional Government as 

much as they dared and to impose their views. In regard to the war 
the Lvoff ministry declared that free Russia did not aspire to domi- 
nate other countries or to get their territory, but that it would not 
allow its own country to come out of the war weakened or humiliated. 
On May 2 it announced to the Allies that Russia would continue in 



THE KERENSKY GOVERNMENT 729 

the war until a complete victory was achieved. The Petrograd 
Council or Soviet, on the other hand, was in favor of a general peace 
to be secured by the workers of all lands, and asserted that the war 
had been begun and was being carried on in the interest of kings 
and capitalists. The Council was powerful as representing the 
capital and was striving hard to dominate the Provisional Govern- 
ment. On May 16 Milyukoff, the able Foreign Minister, was 
forced out of the Government on the ground that he was an imperial- 
ist, he having expressed the hope that Russia would acquire Con- 
stantinople. A Socialist was appointed in his place and Kerensky 
now became Minister of War. This reorganized ministry was 
against a separate peace. 

Kerensky soon became the dominant personality in the govern- 
ment. As Minister of War he endeavored to check the demoraliza- 
tion which was making serious inroads into the army. Discipline 
was disappearing, acts of disobedience, if not actual mutiny, were 
occurring at various points. Kerensky succeeded for a while in 
checking this alarming disorganization and even in arousing the army 
in Galicia to begin a new "drive" which made an advance of ten 
miles, only to be brought to a standstill by renewed mutinies, so that 
all that had been gained was lost (July, 191 7). 

On July 22 Kerensky became head of the Provisional Government 
and remained such until he and his colleagues were overthrown, on 
November 7, by the Bolsheviki of Petrograd. Kerensky 
was a Socialist and was strongly opposed to a separate peace 
with Germany, but was in favor of a revision of peace terms by the 
Allies, in the direction of the formula, "no annexations, no indem- 
nities." The breakdown of discipline in the army continued to 
increase portentously. During the retreat in Galicia, generals found 
that they were obliged to discuss their orders with numerous com- 
mittees of soldiers, and to secure their consent, before those orders 
could be executed. Officers were in some cases shot by their soldiers. 
Large numbers of troops retreated without making any resistance, 
so thoroughly pacifistic had they become as a result of the Socialistic 
propaganda carried on among them. Kerensky publicly character- 
ized these acts as shameful and labored incessantly and with extraor- 
dinary energy to stop the growing anarchy and to restore the 
army as a fighting force, necessary even for the defense of the country, 
for the country was again threatened. His efforts were unavailing 



730 THE WORLD WAR 

and conditions steadily grew worse. The Germans took the impor- 
tant city of Riga on September 2, with practically no opposition. 
The shame and impotence of a great state were being demonstrated 
every day anew. 

THE BOLSHEVIKI SEIZE THE GOVERNMENT 

That shame and that impotence were illustrated in perfection by 
the policy and conduct of the new rulers of Russia, the Bolsheviki, 
who succeeded in overthrowing Kerensky on November 7, and 
in seizing the government, under the leadership of Lenine and 
Trotzky. Several of the ministers were arrested, and army head- 
quarters were captured. Kerensky managed to escape, and was 
not heard of again for several months, when he finally appeared 
in London. Lenine became Prime Minister and Trotzky Minister 
of Foreign Affairs. 

The new government announced its policy at once ; an immediate 

democratic peace, the confiscation of all landed property, the recogni- 

^^ tion of the supreme authoritv of the Soviets or workingmen's 

The new ^ ' . . ° 

governments and soldiers' councils, the election of a constitutional conven- 
^"'"^^ tion. The Bolsheviki revealed themselves adequately, though 

not^ completel}^ in these demands. They were extreme Socialists, 
resolved to effect a Socialistic revolution at once. They were 
unwilling to fight Germans or Austrians. They were willing to 
fight their own fellow-citizens for the purpose of robbing them of 
their property. They cared nothing about national honor. 
"Honor" was not a word in their vocabulary; it was only a con- 
ception of hypocritical capitalists interested solely in feathering 
their own nests and exploiting the downtrodden. The Bolsheviki 
cared nothing for the good faith of Russia, for they wished and in- 
tended to desert Russia's allies and to make a separate peace with 
her enemies despite the fact that Russia had signed a treaty promising 
not to make a separate peace. Their moral standards were not above 
considering a treaty a scrap of paper, were not, therefore, superior to 
the standards of the Germans, in whose pay they were accused of 
being. As destroyers of a great nation, as artists in anarchy, as 
ruthless murderers of fellow- Russians, they were a great success. 

It was evident that with such men in power Russia's participation 
in the war was over and that the burden imposed upon the Western 



THE BOLSHEVIKI IN POWER 731 

Allies would be far greater than ever. The Bolshevik! immediately 
started peace negotiations with the Germans, concluding with them 
an armistice at Brest-Litovsk (December 15), where three months 
later they supinely signed what were probably the most disgraceful 
and disastrous treaties known in the history of any European nation. 
The Russian Revolution and the rise of the Bolsheviki brought 
about the rapid disintegration, not only of the Russian people, but 
of the Russian state as a territorial entity. Finland declared ^. . 

Disintegra- 

its mdependence. The Ukraine, an immense region in the tion of 
south, did the same. Siberia later followed suit. The Ger- ^"^^** 
mans had control of Poland, Lithuania, and the Baltic Provinces and 
consequently declarations of independence were not in order there. 
General Kaledin, the leader of the Cossacks, declared war upon the 
Bolsheviki in the name of the safety of the country. None of 
Russia's allies and none of the neutral states recognized the Bolshev- 
iki as the lawful government of Russia. That honor was reserved 
for the Germans and Austrians and Turks. 

In December the Constituent Assembly, called by the Bolsheviki, 
met in Petrograd. Not proving satisfactory to the latter at its first 
session they sent a body of sailors into the chamber to disperse it. 
That ended the Constituent Assembly and gave a further illustration 
of the meaning of the Bolshevik formula about the self-determination 
of peoples. 

The revolution in Russia in its immediate effects and the interven- 
tion of the United States in its possible ultimate effects were the 
two most outstanding events in the history of 191 7. But, also, 
during that year military events of importance occurred. The 
eastern front saw comparatively little activity as, after the Russian 
Revolution, the Germans were content to watch the development of 
affairs in that country and in the main merely to guard the positions 
they had gained in Russia and Roumania, probably in the expectation 
of shortly imposing peaLce upon those countries and then being able to 
withdraw their troops from them and throw them with decisive force 
upon the western front. 

THE WAR IN 191 7 

In the early months of 191 7 the effects of the Battle of the Somme 
of the previous year were shown to be more important than had been 
supposed, for when the English and the French renewed their 



732 



THE WORLD WAR 



campaign in the same region they encountered a weakened resist- 
ance, the enemy withdrawing before them. Then ensued, in March 
„ and April, a retreat of the Germans to the famous " Hindenburg 

German re- "^ ' ° 

treat and Line," Called by their leaders a "strategical retreat." The 

Germans retired along a hundred-mile front, from Arras to the 

neighborhood of Noyon, evacuating more than a thousand square 



devastation 




Phuto by Central News Photo Service, N. Y. 

Arras Cathedral, after the War 



GERMAN "STRATEGICAL RETREAT" 



733 



miles of French territory which had formerly contained over three 
hundred towns and villages. But, compelled to abandon this terri- 
tory, they committed deeds which added a new hideousness to the 
name of German. They devastated the country as no country in 
Europe had ever been devastated before, and they did it with scien- 
tific thoroughness, and wanton satisfaction. France recovered only 
a scene of indescribable desolation. Buildings, public and private, 
schools and churches, works of art, historical monuments and priceless 
historical records were ruthlessly destro^'ed ; private homes were 




The Ruins of Lens 



stripped clean of furniture which was carted away by the Germans, 
wells were filled with dung, orchards were cut down, roads and 
bridges and railways were blown up. If they must retire, the Germans 
were resolved to leave a region, hitherto one of the most fertile in 
France, ruined and blasted for years and even for decades to come. 
An eye-witness wrote as follows: "With field glasses I could see 
far on either side of every road for miles and miles ; every farm is 
burned, fields destroyed, every garden and every bush uprooted, 
every tree sawed off close to the bottom. It was a terrible sight and 
seemed almost worse than the destruction of men. Those thousands 



734 THE WORLD WAR 

of trees prone upon the earth, their branches waving in the wind, 
seemed undergoing agonies before our eyes." 

Other events on the western front in 19 17 were : the Battle of Arras 
... „.^ fought by the British, from April to June, and in the course 

Vimy Ridge a j i j > 

of which the Canadians distinguished themselves at V'imy 
Ridge ; the long-drawn-out Battle of the Aisne, fought by the French 
from April to November, famous for the fighting about the Chemin des 
Dames; the British offensive in Flanders, from July to December, 
which yielded Passchendaele Ridge and other positions ; the Battle 
of Cambrai, in November and December, in which the Germans 
were compelled to retire several miles on a front of twenty miles. 



THE INVASION OF ITALY 

But while on the French front the Allies made considerable gains, in 
another region they sustained a serious reverse, in Italy. The 
Italians had seized Gorizia in 1916 and in the summer of IQ17 they 
carried on a very successful offensive along the Isonzo and the 
Carso Plateau. But with the breakdown of Russia and the spread of 
pacifism in the Russian armies the Germans were able to send 
large bodies of troops and a great quantity of heavy artillery to the 
aid of their ally, Austria. On October 28, 19 17, the Austro-German 
army seized Gorizia ; on the 30th Udine fell ; a rapid retreat of the 
Italians followed to the Tagliamento. The Germans announced that 
they had captured 1 80,000 prisoners and 1 500 guns. The Tagliamento 
^ „. could not be held and the Italians were driven back to the 

Piave. For days the Allied world held its breath, fearing 
that what had happened to Serbia in 191 5, to Roumania in 1916, 
was now in 1917 to happen to Italy, and that she. would be con- 
quered and eliminated from the war. But the Piave held and the 
attempts of the Central Powers to outflank it in the mountains to 
the north of Venetia, along the Asiago Plateau and other ridges, 
failed. There the invasion was halted. French and English troops 
were rushed to the aid of Italy and their arrival greatly helped and 
encouraged the Italians. But the world had had a bad shock and 
was apprehensive still, lest the Italian line should be broken. The 
Germans announced that the campaign had netted them 300,000 
prisoners and nearly 3000 guns. Whether this was true or not, cer- 
tain it was that they had freed Austria of the enemy and that they 



THE ITALIAN FRONT 



735 



now themselves occupied four thousand square miles of Italian 
territory and that they were in a position to threaten the richest 
section of Italy, which contained, among other things, the great 
munition plants. 

The Allied gains on the western front and those in Asia, which will 
be referred to later, were but a slight comfort in view of the Russian 
and Italian disasters. The year ended in gloom in the Allied camp. 




Farthest Italian Advance Austrian Invasion, October, 1917. 

Italian Front 



But there was at least some satisfaction to be derived from the fact 
that Venice had not been taken, and that that matchless creation of 
art had not been damaged by the ruthlessness of the enemy as had the 
incomparable cathedral of Rheims, the masterpiece of Gothic archi- 
tecture, the living embodiment of French history, whose every stone 
spoke of long lines of kings — and of Joan of Arc. 

The year 1917, therefore, closed in gloom. The collapse of Russia, 
the disaster in Italy, were more alarming in their possible, if not 
probable, consequences than the scattered and costly gains of the 
Allies on the western front and the entrance of America into the war, 



736 THE WORLD WAR 

perhaps too late to be of any material value, were reassuring. In 
western Asia, it is true, the year brought some encouragement to the 
Allies, but how durable or significant the successes there would prove 
to be it was quite impossible to forecast. As the Germans had 
loudly proclaimed their intention to link Berlin with Bagdad, and 
erect a Middle-Europe, and to extend it through Turkey and the 
great valleys of the Euphrates and the Tigris, and as this meant 
nothing less than a pointed threat at the British Empire in India 
and Egypt, it was natural and inevitable that England should accept 
the German challenge in that part of the world as she had accepted 
it in western Europe and on the high seas. Consequently, as early 
as 19 1 5 an expedition had been sent out from India, under General 
Th E r h Townshend, to prevent the consummation of the German 
in Mesopo- plans. But the expedition failed disastrously. After hav- 
tamia -^^g advanced two hundred miles up the Tigris and after 

having seized the city of Kut-el-Amara, General Townshend found 
himself besieged in that place by the Turks and after a few months, 
no relief having reached him, he was forced to surrender with his 
entire army, about ten thousand men, on April 28, 1916, after a siege 
of a hundred and forty-three days. Not only was this a serious 
reverse in itself, but it gravely injured Great Britain's prestige in the 
East. There was nothing for her to do but endeavor to repair the 
damage done. She at once organized another expedition on a larger 
scale and with more careful preparation, which she sent into Mesopo- 
tamia under General Maude, early in 1917. This expedition was 
successful. Kut-el-Amara was recaptured on February 24 and on 
March 11 the British entered Bagdad in triumph. Bagdad was 
not of great strategic importance, but its capture exercised a decided 
moral effect throughout the world. 

Toward the close of the year the British achieved other victories 
over the Turks, farther west, in Palestine. During the earlier years 
Capture of o^ fhe war the Turks had seriously menaced England's control 
Jerusalem qj ^\^q Suez Canal and Egypt. The English resolved to elimi- 
nate this danger once for all by sending an army into Palestine, under 
General AUenby. This army gradually forced its way northward, 
captured Jaffa, the seaport of Jerusalem, in November, and entered 
Jerusalem itself in triumph on December 10, 191 7. Great was the 
rejoicing throughout the Christian world at this recovery of its sacred 
city after seven centuries of Mohammedan control. The achieve- 



THE CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM 



737 




Copyright by Underwood ct- Undcrivood, N. Y. 

General Allenby Entering Jerusalem 

ment of the medieval Crusaders was being repeated. Would the 
new victory of the Christian over the Infidel prove ephemeral, as 
had the earlier one? 

The Germans were not downcast over the turn of events in these 
remote theaters of war. Nor had they any reason to be. On the 
whole they were holding the western front, and the eastern front had 



738 THE WORLD WAR 

disappeared under the terrific blows they had delivered to Russia 
and which had laid her low. On the 22d of December the German 
Emperor was undoubtedly expressing the prevalent German opinion 
of the general situation when he said to the army in France : "The 
year 19 17 with its great battles has proved that the German people 
has, in the Lord of Creation above, an unconditional and avowed 
ally on whom it can absolutely depend. ... If the enemy does not 
want peace, then we must bring peace to the world by battering in 
with the iron fist and shining sword the doors of those who will 
not have peace. . . . But our enemies still hope, with the assistance 
of new allies, to defeat you and then to destroy forever the world 
position won by Germany in hard endeavor. They will not succeed. 
Trusting in our righteous cause and in our strength, we face the year 
1 91 8 with firm confidence and iron will. Therefore, forward with 
God to fresh deeds and fresh victories ! ' ' 



THE BOLSHEVIKI AND PEACE 

The first of the fresh victories were to be achieved on the diplomatic 
field and were to be supremely satisfactory to the Germans. They 
consisted of the treaties of peace imposed by them upon Russia and 
Roumania, and upon the big fragments of former Russia which had 
declared their independence rather than remain connected with a 
country controlled by the Bolsheviki, namely the Ukraine and 
Finland. 

The Bolsheviki demanded immediate peace and when they suc- 
ceeded in driving Kerensky from power, and themselves assumed con- 
trol, they began negotiations to that end. They signed an armistice 
at Brest-Litovsk, the German army headquarters, on December 15, 
19 1 7. The leading personages in the ensuing discussion were 
Kiihlmann for Germany, Czemin for Austria-Hungary, and Trotzky 
for Russia. The negotiations were long and frequently stormy. 
Trotzky urged that the peace be based upon the principles of "no 
annexations, no indemnities." The Central Powers pretended to 
accept this formula. Their insincerity and duplicity in announcing 
their adhesion to this principle and to that of the right of peoples 
to determine their own allegiance were shortly made apparent. 
They refused to withdraw their troops from the occupied parts of 
Russia and they indicated clearly that their aims were the opposite 



THE TREATY OF BREST-LITOVSK 739 

of their professions. At this Trotzky balked and withdrew from the 
conference and the Russian Government announced that it would not 
sign "an annexationist treaty" but at the same time it announced 
that the war was at an end and it ordered the complete demobilization 
of the Russian troops on all fronts. 

Germany, however, refused to accept this solution of "no war, but 
no peace." It insisted on a treaty in black and white. As the nego- 
tiations had been broken off by the departure of the Russian Treaty of 
delegates on February 10, the German army immediately as- Brest-Litovsk 
sumed the offensive and began a fresh invasion of Russia, advancing 
on a front of five hundred miles and to within seventy miles of Petro- 
grad. This speedily brought the Russians to terms and they signed on 
March 3, 1918, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the most notorious "an- 
nexationist treaty " on record. Its principal provisions were : Russia 
surrendered all claims to Poland, Lithuania, Courland, Livonia, and 
Esthonia ; she also renounced all claims to Finland and the Ukraine 
and agreed to recognize their independence and to make peace with 
them ; she surrendered Batum, Erivan, and Kars in the Caucasus to 
Turkey, and she promised to cease all revolutionary propaganda in 
the ceded regions and in the countries of the Central Alliance. 

Subsequently and in direct violation of the plain intent of one of 
the articles of the treaty, the promise of a large money indemnity was 
exacted from Russia. 

By this treaty Russia lost an enormous territory, about half a 
million square miles, a territory more than twice as large as the Ger- 
man Empire. She lost a population of about 65,000,000, j^.^ 
which was about that of the German Empire. A year or less ment of 
of Bolshevism had sufficed to undo the work of all the Russian ^"^^'^ 
Emperors from Peter the Great to Nicholas II. So complete a 
mutilation of a great country Europe had never seen. Russia was 
thrust back into the condition in which she had been in the seven- 
teenth century and which even then was found intolerable. Never 
in modern times has a great power surrendered such vast territories 
by a single stroke of the pen. Pacifism and internationalism had 
borne their natural fruit with unexpected swiftness. Gorky, the 
Russian novelist, and considered a radical until the Bolsheviki 
appeared and gave a new extension to that word, has estimated that 
this treaty robbed Russia of 37 per cent of her manufacturing indus- 
tries, 75 per cent of her coal, and 73 per cent of her iron. 



740 THE WORLD WAR 

What the future of the ceded territories should be was not indicated 
beyond the statement that "Germany and Austria-Hungary intend 
to decide the future fate of these territories by agreement with their 
population." A few weeks later the Central Powers dictated a 
pitiless treaty to Roumania, forcing large cessions of territory and 
minutely and ingeniously squeezing her of her economic resources 
for their advantage. 

The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk laid bare the soul of modern Germany, 
It proved to all the world that, whatever her professions might be, 
her greed was unabashed and unrestrained. And this greed was 
characteristic not simply of her rulers, military and civil. All 
Germany applauded. The same Reichstag which in July, 191 7, 
had voted in favor of the principle of "no annexations, no indemni- 
ties" now enthusiastically ratified the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the 
Socialists joining in. The rest of the world now knew, if it had not 
known before, what it might expect, if it was forced to pass under the 
same yoke. Germany stood completely unmasked. Her ideal was 
revealed in all its nakedness. 

Having arranged matters in the east to her satisfaction, and no 

longer threatened or preoccupied in that quarter, Germany now 

turned practicallv her entire attention to the western front, 

Germany ji i i i 

and the Confident that, by concentrated energy of attack, she could 

^ont^'^'^ at last conquer there and snatch the victory which had so 

long eluded her and which would end the war. Transferring 
thither her large eastern armies she was confident that now she could 
compel a decision and could force a settlement to her taste. One more 
campaign in France and all would be well. The spring drive was to be 
begun early, the intention being to separate the French and English 
armies and then defeat each in turn swiftly — before the Americans 
should arrive in any such numbers as to be able to influence the course 
of events. 

THE WAR IN 19 1 8 

The drive opened on March 21, 1918. The mood in which it was 

begun was expressed by the Kaiser the day before : "The prize of vic- 

The German tory," said he, "must not and will not fail us. No soft peace, 

drive of 1918 byj- Qne corresponding to Germany's interests." A month 

later the German financial secretary added an appendant to this 

Imperial thought when he said in the Reichstag on April 23: 



THE TREATY OF BREST-LITOVSK 



•41 




^-'CJ "^-^ '/1i'rfvn<i?xX^'' Vitebsk o „ , , „ , 
l" Jj J^'^^' ?? / ( Smolensk Kaluga^ 

F^f hr'T IvnrjR - U S' S I A 



Danzig 
GERMANY 



^.^_f 



Miiibk' 



Mogilev 



o Voronesh ^. 




S E R V 1 a;. R U M a N I k ^2: 

r Bucharest 

.^ BULGARIA 



\ 



TREAH OF BREST-LITOVSK 

1918 

SHOWING TERRFTORY SURRENDERED BY RUSSIA 



Scale of Miles 

10 20 ■ 30 40 



Kastamuni 
TURKEY IN ASIA 



742 



THE WORLD WAR 



"We do not yet know the amount of the indemnity which we 
shall win." 

This great offensive, the greatest of the war, opened auspiciously 
and for three months proceeded according to the heart's desire. It 
was ushered in by the greatest gas attack Europe had ever known ; 
also by a long-distance bombardment of Paris by a new gun of 

greater range than any previ- 
ous gun had possessed. The 
ensuing attack was one of 
terrific force and was de- 
signed to spring the French 
and English armies apart at 
their point of juncture. The 
objective was Amiens. As 
a matter of fact the English 
left was, in the next few days, 
driven back toward Arras 
and the English center driven 
beyond the Somme. This 
actually made an opening. 
The English front was broken 
and a great disaster might 
have easily resulted, for the 
Germans now tried to turn 
the English right by cavalry. 
They were, however, met and 
checked by French cavalry 
just in the nick of time. 
But between March 21 and 
March 28, the Germans made 
great progress. Town after 
town fell into their hands, Peronne, Bapaume, Ham, Albert, Noyon, 
Montdidier. It was at this critical moment that General Pershing 
placed all the forces under his command absolutely at the disposal 
of Marshal Foch to be used as he might see fit. Foch had, so 
great was the danger, the greatest since the Battle of the Mame, 
been appointed Commander in Chief of the Allied Armies on the 
Western Front on March 28. At last the Allies had achieved unity 
of command. 




Marshal Foch 



THE GERMAN ADVANCE 743 

After a slight pause the Germans attacked the EngUsh in the north, 
in Flanders at the point where their army and the Portuguese were 
joined. By April 12 the English had been forced to make a consider- 
able retreat. It was then that General Haig issued a special order to 
his men which would have discouraged and demoralized men less 
self-reliant and less fond of the blunt truth, however unpleasant. 
This utterance of the English commander will remain historic : 

"Three weeks ago to-day the enemy began his terrific attacks 
against us on a fifty-mile front. His objects are to separate us from 
the French, to take the Channel ports, and to destroy the Haig s special 
British Army. . . . Words fail me to express the admiration °'^^^^ 
which I feel for the splendid resistance offered by all ranks of our 
army under the most trying circumstances. 

"Many among us are now tired. To those I would say that 
victory will belong to the side which holds out the longest. The 
French Army is moving rapidly and in great force to our support. 
There is no other course open to us but to fight it out. 

" Every position must be held to the last man. There must be no 
retirement. With our backs to the wall, and believing in the justice 
of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end. The safety of our 
homes and the freedom of mankind depend alike upon the conduct of 
each one of us at this critical moment." 

The bitterest fighting continued and the British lost important 
positions near Ypres, the famous Messines and Wytschaete ridges, 
and then Mount Kemmel. But French reinforcements came and the 
Germans were checked. Ypres still held out. 

The Germans had suffered very severe losses in making these 
attacks and gains. They needed time to reorganize their exhausted 
divisions. Apparently, too, there was a change at this moment in 
their high command, Ludendorff succeeding Hindenburg. Suddenly, 
on May 27, Ludendorff launched a new attack in an unexpected 
quarter on a forty-mile front, from Soissons to Rheims. On the 
29th Soissons fell. The Germans advanced rapidly. By May 31 
they were at the Marne once more after four years. In four days 
they had taken 45,000 prisoners and an enormous amount of war 
material. They were held at Chateau-Thierry on June 2 by French 
reserves which were rushed to the scene. The Germans were within 
forty miles of Paris and had gained nearly a thousand square miles 
of territory. 



744 



THE WORLD WAR 



The Americans were beginning to count. On May 28 they cap- 
tured Cantigny and two hundred and twenty-five prisoners. Later 
they helped the French check the Germans at Chateau-Thierry (sha- 
Beiieau to'-tyar-re). They also foiled an attack in Neuilly Wood, 

advanced two-thirds of a mile, and took two hundred and 
seventy prisoners. On June 6 and 7 the Marines advanced two 
miles on a front of six miles and seized Torcy and Bouresches. A 



Wood 




CopvTight by Underwood & Underwood, N. Y. 

Ruins or Chateau-Thierry 

little later they occupied a part of Belleau Wood. These were details 
but useful and auspicious. 

On June 9 the Germans made an attack on a front of twenty 
miles from Montdidier to Noyon, pressing the French center back 
several miles but at great cost. Then came a lull. 

On July 15 they began their fifth and final drive in this remarkably 
successful campaign. Attacking on a sixty-mile front east and west 
of Rheims they pushed forward, crossed the Marne at several points, 
and were evidently aiming at Chalons. They seized Chateau- 
Thierry. 

From March 21 to July 18, 191 8, the Germans had carried on a 
colossal offensive and had taken many prisoners, much territory, and 
enormous booty. They were astride the rivers that lead down to 



A CRITICAL MOMENT 745 

Paris, itself not far away. Might not one or two more pushes give 
them the coveted capital of France and seal the doom of the Allied 
cause? Elated by four months of victories, which had brought 
them nearer and nearer the intended prey, inflamed by visions of 
imminent and unparalleled success, they were eager for the final 
spring. Then all would be over and a peace could be imposed upon 
the West similar to that imposed upon the East at Brest-Litovsk. 
The world would recognize its master, would be re-shaped according 
to Hohenzollern ideas, and would henceforth receive its marching 
orders from Berlin. 



WAS AMERICA "TOO LATE"? 

Not many graver moments, if any, have ever occurred in history. 
The world stood gripped by an intensity of anxiety and apprehension, 
painful, heart-sinking, intolerable. Particularly in America did a 
great and desolating wave of dread and foreboding sweep over the 
public mind. Minutes seemed like hours and hours like weeks, 
so racking was the suspense. Had we arrived too late? We had 
been so slow in seeing our duty, in recognizing our responsibility in 
the desperate drama of our times, we had finally entered the war 
so unprepared, that it seemed only too likely that we were to pay, 
and that the world was to pay, a grievous price for our tardy percep- 
tion and decision. And would that price include, for us, not only 
national insecurity, but national dishonor and disgrace? The 
answer to these questions hung upon events, and events thus far 
had not been reassuring, had, on the contrary, seemed to be converg- 
ing toward disaster. 

We had done much in material ways for the common cause since 
our entrance into the war. Our navy, efficient and ready, had begun, 
from the first day, to render useful and important services. But 
by the close of 1917, we had less than 200,000 men in France. How 
many of these were prepared for front-line work it is impossible to say. 
But certainly they were far too few for the emergency. On March 27 
Lloyd George, the British Prime Minister, made an urgent appeal for 
"American reinforcements in the shortest possible space of time" and 
declared that "we are at the crisis of the war, attacked by an immense 
superiority of German troops." The appeal was answered. From 
then on there was a rapid and increasing movement of American 



746 



THE WORLD WAR 




THE SECOND BATTLE OF THE MARNE 747 

troops to Europe, 83,000 in March, 117,000 in April, 244,000 in 
May, 278,000 in June, and by the end of July there were 1,300,000 
American soldiers in France. By November there were more than 
two million. 

So desperate was the situation in mid-summer, 1918, that the 
French Government was prepared at any moment to leave Paris, as 
it had done in 19 14. 

But this moment was never to come. For Marshal Foch now 
struck a blow which freed Paris from danger, and which inaugurated 
a new and, as we now see, the final phase of the war. On ^ ^ 

'^ Foch as- 

July 18 he assumed the offensive, attacking the enemy on the sumes the 
flank from Chateau-Thierry on the Marne to the river Aisne. °^^'*®''® 
With French and American troops he took the Germans by surprise, 
and achieved a brilliant success. His entire line advanced from four 
to six miles, reclaiming twenty villages. Thousands of prisoners 
were taken, the Americans alone capturing over four thousand. 
A large number of guns were also seized. On the following days, the 
counter-offensive continued. Each day it achieved successes ; each 
day it gained additional momentum. The Allied world passed 
through a new experience. An uninterrupted series of triumphs for 
the armies of Marshal Foch filled the days and then the weeks, after 
he had seized the initiative on July 18. 

THE SECOND BATTLE OF THE MARNE 

By July 21 the Germans, threatened on the flank, were forced to 
withdraw the troops which had crossed the Marne. The Second 
Battle of the Marne was over and took its place in history, along- 
side the First Battle of the Marne, having accomplished the same 
deliverance of Paris and having begun the deliverance of France. 
In that battle Americans had taken an important part, although it 
should not be exaggerated. Seventy per cent of the troops participat- 
ing in it were French. Forced to recross the Marne, the Germans 
next took their stand on the river Vesle. Bitter fighting occurred 
there. Again they were compelled to retreat and their next stand 
was at the Aisne. Week after week their backward movement con- 
tinued, stubbornly yet unsuccessfully contested. Foch's counter- 
offensive widened out far to the east of Rheims, far to the north of 
Soissons. Between the Argonne Forest and the river Meuse the 



748 



THE WORLD WAR 



main American army, intrusted with a formidable and difficult task, 
fought desperately day after day, pushing steadily but slowly and at 
great cost farther and farther north. West of the Argonne the 
French were driving the Germans back. 

At the same time, the French and the British, with contingents of 
the other Allies, Italians, Belgians, Portuguese, Americans, inter- 
spersed, were attacking various points in the long line from Soissons 




Copyright by Committee on Public Information. 

The First German Prisoners Captured by the Americans in the 
Saint-Mihiel Salient 

to the English Channel. All these scattered attacks, carefully 
Foch's great Coordinated, were but parts of a comprehensive plan elaborated 
campaign ]^y Marshal Foch, who was now revealing himself to the world 
as the master-intellect of the war. One does not know which to 
admire the more, the incomparable conception of this campaign 
or the marvelous execution. Unremitting pressure everywhere, 
damaging thrusts here and there, such was the evident policy, the 
purpose being to maintain in Allied hands the initiative and the 
offensive which had been seized on the fateful July i8. Without 



BATTLE OF THE HINDENBURG LINE 749 

haste, without rest, all through August and September and October 
the gigantic assault continued. The Allies steadily advanced as 
victors over ground which a short time before they had been com- 
pelled to abandon. Verdun was freed from the German menace, 
so was Rheims, so was Ypres. It would be impossible in any brief 
space, or, indeed, at length, even to catalogue the long list of incidents 
and events, in themselves often of great importance and interest, in 
this vast and complicated movement. Many towns and villages, 
some of them in possession of the Germans since 1914, were recovered. 
All that the Germans had won in their drive from March 21 to July 18 
was lost, and the Allies then pressed on to conquer the rest of the 
territory of France, held so long by the Germans, to smash their 
retreating lines, wherever established, and to hurl them out of France 
and out of Belgium. 

One detail of importance and of great interest to Americans in this 
general campaign was the elimination of the Saint-Mihiel . . . 

7 • - ,/x f- , T. 1 ■ , o , Saint-Mihiel 

(san-me-yel ) salient by Pershmg s troops on September 12-13. 

By the end of September, after paying a heav}^ price for their 
retreat, the Germans were back on the famous Hindenburg Line, an 
intricate and powerful system of defenses which thej^ had for years 
been building. Here they planned to hold, and then to institute an 
aggressive peace propaganda among the nations supposed to be tired 
of war. The only way to block this purpose was to smash the Hin- 
denburg Line and to compel the enemy to hurry on incessantly toward 
Germany. Could this be done ? 

THE BATTLE OF THE HINDENBURG LINE 

The Battle of the Hindenburg Line will perhaps rank in history as 
the decisive battle of the Great War, as momentous as the " Battle of 
the Nations" at Leipsic in 1813, which foreshadowed the doom of 
the Napoleonic Empire. In each case the arrogant dream of world 
power was summarily dissipated. As, after Leipsic, France had been 
invaded, so, after the Battle of the Hindenburg Line, the invasion of 
Germany seemed possible and likely. Napoleon, in a few months, 
had been compelled to abdicate. Might history repeat itself, after 
an interval of a hundred and five years? The climax of the four 
years' war was rapidly approaching. 

The battle opened on September 26, with attacks on the two widely 



750 



THE WORLD WAR 




BREAKING THE HINDENBURG LINE 751 

separated flanks. On that day the first American army under 
General Liggett in conjunction with a French army under Gouraud 
moved against the Germans on the German left. The Americans 
fought between the Argonne Forest and the Meuse and at first 
advanced swiftly, taking many villages. Gouraud on the other side 
of the Argonne pushed forward. The Franco-American drive was 
not halted but rendered slower when German reserves were rushed to 
the scene. 

Meanwhile Belgian and British troops had attacked the German 
right flank far to the north in Belgium and had been successful in 
driving a wedge between the Germans on the Belgian coast and those 
in the region of Lille. Again reserves were rushed by Ludendorff to 
meet this danger. But neither here in Flanders nor at the other 
extremity in the Argonne was the Allied pressure relaxed. 

Finally Foch was ready for his chief blow. On October 8 he 
attacked the enemy, anxious about both flanks, in the center. The 
attack was made between Cambrai and Saint-Quentin (san-kon-taii') 
by three British armies under Byng, Rawlinson, and Home, aided 
by the French under Debeney. Here the British achieved perhaps 
the greatest victory in their history. Hope, repeatedly deferred, was 
realized at last. In three days the British drove straight through the 
Hindenburg Line on a front of twelve miles, and where it was strong- 
est, and then pushed on into the open country. That boasted de- 
fense was no longer invincible. Saint-Quentin fell and so, shortly, 
did Cambrai. 

The consequences of this breaking of the Hindenburg Line were 
enormous. The British pushed on toward Valenciennes. Activity 
was redoubled along the two flanks and soon advances were Progress of 
made pretty much along the whole line from the English the Allies 
Channel to Verdun. It was a wonderful cooperative movement with 
glory enough for all the Allies, and to spare. Laon, a tremendous 
stronghold, was soon evacuated. By October 16 the Germans had 
had to give up the Belgian coast, Ostend, Zeebrugge. Then Lille, 
Roubaix, and Turcoing were evacuated. In three weeks an amazing 
victory had been won over positions selected and long prepared by 
the Germans themselves. The Americans pushed steadily down the 
Meuse. After October 16 it was merely a question of time when the 
Germans would inevitably be driven back into their own country. 
Each subsequent day continued the tale of territory recovered, of 



752 



THE WORLD WAR 



towns captured, of a growing demoralization of the German army. 
The greatest battle of the war had been decisively won. It only 
remained to gather in the harvest. The superiority of French mili- 
tary science over German military science was established, and the 
name of Marshal Foch took its place among the greatest names of 
military history. 

Meanwhile in other theaters of this far-flung war momentous 
events were occurring, contributing powerfully to the gathering 




American Mujtary Cemetery at Belleau Wood, France 

culmination. From e^'ery front and with each new day came news 
of victories so astounding and so decisive and attended with con- 
sequences so immediate and far-reaching that it was evident that 
the hour of supreme triumph was rapidly approaching, that a terrible 
chapter in the history of humanity was drawing to a close. 



ALLENBY'S CAMPAIGN IN PALESTINE 

From Palestine came the news that Allenby, who had taken 
Jerusalem in December, 191 7, was on the go again. With an army 



ALLENBY'S CAMPAIGN IN PALESTINE 753 

of 125,000 men, among whom was a small French contingent, he 
carried out a brilliant campaign against the Turks. Beginning in the 
middle of September, and making a rapid and consummate use of 
cavalry, he was able to get around them and in their rear, enveloping 
them, and delivering a staggering blow in the plains of Samaria. In 
the course of a few days Allenby captured 70,000 prisoners and 700 
guns and practically all the supplies of the Turkish army. Following 
up this victory he pushed up to Damascus, which he entered on 
October i, 191 8, taking 7,000 prisoners. On October 6 a French 
squadron seized Beirut, the chief seaport of Syria. Then began 
a rapid drive toward Aleppo, the object being to cut the Bagdad 
railway and thus isolate the Turks who were fighting in Mesopotamia. 
On October 15, Homs, halfway between Damascus and Aleppo, fell, 
and also the port of Tripoli on the coast. A few days later Aleppo 
was taken. The fate of Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine, and Arabia 
was decided. Those regions, which for centuries had been under 
the blight of Turkish rule, were now freed. The Turkish Empire 
in that quarter of the world was a thing of the past. Also the dream 
of a German road from Berlin to Bagdad was now shattered. 

SURRENDER OF BULGARIA 

And while the Turkish Empire was being amputated in the East, 
it was being effectively isolated in the West. Bulgaria, which bordered 
Turkey in Europe, was being eliminated from the war. Almost 
at the very time that Allenby began his attack in Samaria, Franchet 
d'Esperey, a hero of the first Battle of the Marne, and now 
commander of the Allied army in the Balkans, an army consisting 
of French, British, Greek, Serbian, and Italian troops, attacked 
the Bulgarians between the Vardar and the Cerna rivers, and broke 
their lines in two, rendering their position highly critical. Ten days 
later, on September 29, Bulgaria signed an armistice which meant 
nothing less than unconditional surrender. She agreed to evacuate 
all the Greek and Serbian territory which she had occupied, to 
demobilize her army, to permit the Allied troops to use anj^ strategic 
points in Bulgaria they might wish to, as well as all means of com- 
munication. Bulgaria was thus out of the war. The Berlin-Bagdad 
dream was twice dead. Railroad communication between Turkey 
and Germany was cut. The grandiose German plan of a Middle 



754 THE WORLD WAR 

Europe, of which the world had heard so much, was rapidly being 
pushed into the lumber-room of damaged and discarded gimcracks. 
Turkey was verging swiftly toward her fate. Serbia was quickly 
reconquered by the Serbians and for the Serbians, and it could only 
be a question of a short time before Roumania would be able to rise 
again, and denounce the infamous Treaty of Bucharest which Ger- 
many and Austria-Hungary had imposed upon her less than five 
months before, on May 7, 1918, a treaty which had practically robbed 
her of her independence, both economic and political. 

It was a matter of detail, though pleasing in itself, when on Octo- 
ber 3, the self-styled Czar of Bulgaria, Ferdinand, who had ruled 
Revolution for thirty-onc years, abdicated in favor of his son, Crown 
in Bulgaria Prince Boris, twenty-four years of age. Ferdinand was the 
second of the Balkan kings to lose his throne as a result of his conduct 
in the World W^ar, Constantine of Greece having preceded him into 
exile in June, 19 17. The new King Boris HI was shortly forced to 
abdicate and a republic was proclaimed. The republic, however, 
was short-lived, having failed to gain the necessary support, and the 
abdication was withdrawn. 

VICTORIOUS ITALY 

While such shattering events were occurring in the East, in the 
Balkans and in France, the war flamed up once more in Italy. It was 
in October, 19 17, that Italy had suffered her great and dangerous re- 
verse. It was then that she was thrown out of Austria, across the 
Isonzo and that she herself was invaded as far as the Piave. She had 
experienced colossal losses in men and in equipment. A year from 
that date, October, 1918, restored in morale and reinvigorated in 
every way, Italy assumed the offensive against the Austrians. Her 
attack was successful from the start and in the succeeding days 
grew portentously until she achieved an amazing triumph which 
largely effaced the memories of the previous year. The hostile line 
was broken and the Austrians were compelled to withdraw pell-mell 
toward their own country. It was a rout and resulted in the loss 
of hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of big guns. 

TURKEY ELIMINATED FROM THE WAR 

The atmosphere was clearing rapidly owing to these decisive 
events. Both Turkey and Austria were ready to quit the war. Both 



DISSOLUTION OF AUSTRIA-HUNGARY 755 

asked an armistice. On October 31 the Allied Powers granted an 
armistice to Turkey on terms that amounted to unconditional sur- 
render. The Dardanelles and the Bosporus were to be freely opened 
to the Allies, who might also occupy the forts that protected them. 
Access to the Black Sea was thus guaranteed. The Turkish army 
was to be immediately demobilized. The Allies were to have the 
right to occupy any strategic points they might desire or need to. 
Other terms completed the defeat of Turkey and registered her exit 
from the war. 

AUSTRIA BEGS AN ARMISTICE 

The armistice granted Austria on November 4 contained similar 
conditions and also conditions even more severe. The Austro-Hun- 
garian armies must be demobilized and must relinquish to the Allies 
and the United States a large part of their equipment. Austria 
must evacuate all territories occupied since the beginning of the war. 
Practically, too, she must give up the Trentino, Trieste, Istria and a 
part of the Dalmatian coast. All military and railway equipment 
must be left where it was and be at the disposal of the Allies. All 
German troops must be evacuated from Austria within fifteen days. 
All Allied prisoners held by Austria must be immediately restored to 
the Allies. A large part of the Austrian navy must be handed over. 
Several other provisions only emphasized in detail Austria's complete 
defeat. 

Meanwhile Austria-Hungary was in rapid process of disintegration. 
Every despatch brought news of popular outbreaks from all parts of 
the Dual Monarchy. The Czecho-Slovaks declared their ^. 

-' Disruption of 

independence, dethroned the • monarch and proclaimed a Austria- 
republic. Hungary declared her independence and ap- ""^ary 
parently prepared to become a republic. It was rumored that 
Emperor Karl had fled, had abdicated, had been deposed. The 
truth was hard to discover, reports being so fragmentary and con- 
flicting. Vienna evidently fell into the hands of the revolutionists 
and socialists and the German sections of Austria were said to have 
likewise declared their independence. The ancient empire was 
breaking up and several new states were rapidly evolving. Nation- 
alistic, democratic, and socialistic forces were struggling for recogni- 
tion and control. What the ultimate outcome would be no man 
could tell. The very winds had been let loose. Whether the 



756 THE WORLD WAR 

House of Hapsburg still existed was uncertain. That it was doomed 
to vanish completely and that, too, very soon, seemed assured, if, 
indeed, it had not already vanished. No one knew what the next 
day or hour would bring forth in this maelstrom of fermentation, 
in this confusion worse confounded. 

The curtain was rapidly descending, the fifth act of the fearful 
tragedy of our times was closing with unexpected abruptness. Bul- 
garia, Turkey, and Austria-Hungary were out of the war. There re- 
mained the German Empire. Deserted by her Allies, and herself 
being rapidly driven from France and Belgium, and with the invasion 
of her own country not only probable but actually impending, what 
would this arch-conspirator of the age, this "natural foe to liberty," 
at home and everywhere, what would she do, what could she do, in 
a world so strangely altered since Brest-Litovsk, since Chateau- 
Thierry? The handwriting on the wall was becoming larger and 
more legible and more terrifying. The evil days were drawing nigh 
for a dread accounting. What would the proud and mighty German 
Empire do ? 

GERMANY SEEKS PEACE 

What she did was to make a frantic effort for peace, appealing to 
President W^ilson to bring about a peace conference, pretending to 
accept the various terms he had indicated in his speeches of the year 
as a proper basis for the new age, reforming her government rapidly 
in order to meet the more obvious criticisms which foreigners had 
made against it as autocratic and militaristic. The outcome of 
these manoeuvres was the elaboration by the Allies and the United 
States at Versailles of the terms on which they would grant an armis- 
tice. These terms were to be communicated by Marshal Foch to 
such a delegation as the German Government should send to receive 
them at a place to be indicated by the Generalissimo. On Friday 
morning, November 8, Marshal Foch received the German armistice 
delegation in a railroad car at Senlis in France and read to them 
the terms agreed upon for a cessation of hostilities. They were 
allowed seventy-two hours in which to consult their superiors and in 
which to sign or reject the armistice. 

Meanwhile revolution had begun in Germany. On Thursday, 
November 7, mutiny broke out at Kiel. Several of the German 
warships were seized by the mutineers and the red flag was hoisted 



REVOLUTION IN GERMANY 



757 



over them. On that and succeeding days similar movements oc- 
curred in various cities and states, and revolutionary governments, 
local or regional, generally headed by socialists, were announced Revolution 
from various localities, with what exactness one could not tell, Germany 
from Hamburg, Bremen, Tilsit, Chemnitz, Stuttgart, Brunswick, 
Bavaria, finally from Berlin. Reports circulated like wild-fire that 
reigning princes were abdicating or being dethroned, that workmen's 
and soldiers' councils or Soviets were being formed in various centers 
and were seizing power. Demands were being made that the Kaiser 




CiiMIML 



Showing headquarters train of Marshal Foch in which the Armistice was signed by 
the German envoj's, November ii, igi8. 

abdicate. There were all the phenomena of a breaking up of the 
great deep. German society was being torn by alarming dissensions, 
the practical unanimity of the past four years was pounding to pieces 
upon the jagged reefs of defeat, and defeat with discredit and dis- 
honor. An hour of fearful retribution had struck. There was 
dismay and disarray in the public mind, vacillation and poverty 
of counsel among the military and political leaders of the land. 
Moral bankruptcy, as well as material, stared the German nation 
in the face, that nation which had been a unit in war as long as war 
offered chances for aggrandizement and loot. Socialists, with the 



758 



THE WORLD WAR 



William II 



exception of a paltry few, had worked hand in glove with militarists 
and Pan-Germans and the assorted hosts of embattled adventurers 
and soldiers of fortune ; they had done this for four years, the easy 
tools of autocracy and egregious militarism. But now this band of 
international plunderers was falling apart. Each was seeking safety 
as it might from the fast approach- 
ing storm. 

On Saturday, November g, a wire- 
less message picked up by Paris and 
Abdication of by London announced, to the 
stupefaction of the world, that 
the Emperor of Germany, W'illiam 
II, had abdicated, and that his 
son, the Crown Prince Frederick 
William, had renounced his rights 
to the throne, that a socialist, Ebert, 
had been made Chancellor, and that 
a German National Assembly would 
be speedily elected by universal 
suffrage and that that Assembly 
would "settle finally the future 
form of government of the German 
nation and of those peoples which 
might be desirous of coming within 
the empire." 

On the following day, Sunday, 
the world heard that the revolution 
was still spreading, that Cologne 
cathedral was flying a red flag, that 
Hanover, Oldenberg, Magdeburg, 
Saxony and other towns and states 
were seething with rebellion. 

On Monday Americans awoke to the screeching of whistles and the 
din of bells which signified that the armistice terms had been accepted 
by the German Government and that "the war was over," hostilities 
to cease at eleven o'clock that morning, Paris time. Rushing for 
their morning papers they ascertained this further fact that Wil- 
liam II, Emperor of Germany, who for thirty years had been the 
most powerful monarch in the world, had fled for refuge in an auto- 




Croix de Guerre 



ABDICATION OF WILLIAM II 759 

mobile to Holland. Thus the Last of the Hohenzollerns made his 
sorry exit from the scene, having plunged the world into turmoil and 
tribulation indescribable, the memory of which would haunt mankind 
with nameless horror for decades to come, the heartless, crushing cost 
of which would afflict and sadden generations j^et unborn. 
The evil that men do lives after them. 

REFERENCES 

The European War : Gibbons, The New Map of Europe, Chaps. XIX-XXI, 
pp. 368-412; Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, i87o-igi4; 
Schmitt, England and Germany; BuUard, Diplomacy of the Great War; Allen, 
The Great War; Davenport, History of the Great War; Beyens, Germany before 
the War (by the Belgian Minister at Berlin) ; Rohrbach, Germany's Isolation 
(Chicago, 1915) ; Gauss, C, The German Emperor as Shown in his Public Utter- 
ance (1915) ; Billow, Bernhard von, Imperial Germany (1914) ; Headlam, J. W., 
History of Twelve Days, July 24-August 4, 1914 (1915); Stowell, G. C, The 
Diplomacy of the War of 191 4, Vol. I (191 5) ; Chitwood, O. P., The Immediate 
Causes of the Great War; F. H. Simonds, The World War; P. Azan, The War of 
Position and The Warfare of Today; D. W. Johnson, Topography and Strategy 
in the War; C. D. Hazen, Alsace-Lorraine vnder German Rule; J. Spargo, 
Bolshevism; Davis, Anderson, and Tyler, The Roots of the War. 

Of great value to teachers and students are : Harding, S. B., Topical Outline of 
the War; Dutcher, G. M., Selected Bibliography of the War. These and other 
useful aids are to be found in McKinley, A. E., Collected Materials for the Study 
of the War. 



CHAPTER XXXVII 
MAKING THE PEACE 

For four years, three months, and more, the world had been passing 
through the hideous ordeal by fire. The end had come suddenly, 
unexpectedly, as had the beginning in 1914. The agony of uncer- 
tainty, the distress of clashing hopes and fears, the tense strain of 
daily, hourly anxiety, the ever present sense of indescribable suffering 
and woe, now gave way to the exultation of victory, to pride in the 
glory of the achievement, to gratitude to those who had won it. 
The sacrifice had, at any rate, not been in vain. The golden hour 
had arrived at last, so often and so long deferred. Liberty had once 
more triumphed in its century-old struggle with despotism and now 
the opportunity had come for the spirit of freedom to inherit the 
earth. Civilization had hung upon the arbitrament of the sword. 
The unconquerable spirit of the brave had once more saved the 
world. 

But while the worst was over in the appalling tragedy of our times, 

while war was no longer to slay its thousands daily and create new 

carnage hourly, the clearing away of the colossal wreckage of the war, 

the new ordering of the world after a convulsion that had 

Victory nee- ° 

essary to affected every part of it, would, it was obvious, require much 
^®**^® time and patience. The Allies had refused to listen for a 

moment to the ignoble and dangerous suggestion of a peace without 
victory, since such an outcome would mean nothing less than peace 
with defeat. "The war has ended," wrote an editor immediately 
after the armistice, ' ' in the decisive victory of the free peoples of the 
world — the only end which could be worthy of the ideals for which 
they have fought and could redeem the sacrifices they have made, 
the only end which could enable them to build a new and better order 
of civilization on the ruins of the old." 

Mr. Asquith, prime minister of Great Britain, had said at the very 
outset of the war that England would never sheathe her sword "until 

760 



THE ARMISTICE WITH GERMANY 761 

the military domination of Prussia" had been "wholly and finally 
destroyed." That end was achieved at last. The most mighty 
military despotism of the world was overthrown ; an over- 
weening national pride was abased ; a powerful and vainglo- tion of 
rious monarch was a fugitive from the wrath of man ; the P^.ssia's 

. . militarism 

colossal structure erected by Bismarck was in process of dissolu- 
tion — such were the surprising and dramatic incidents of the closing 
scene, incidents calculated to impress profoundly the minds of men. 
In the spring of 1 91 8 the Prussian system was on the verge of a stupen- 
dous victory ; in the autumn that system crashed in utter ruin. Retri- 
bution so swift and so complete has rarely been witnessed on this earth. 
"Twenty years after my death," Bismarck once said, "I mean to 
rise from my coffin, to see whether Germany has stood in honor before 
the world." Bismarck died in 1898. Had he returned to life in 1918 
his rage would have been Homeric at the reckless and blatant Bismarck's 
incompetence of his successors, wasting, in a wild, insensate prophecy 
gamble, the goodly patrimony he had left them and leaving Germany 
pilloried before the conscience of mankind. Long before his death, 
indeed, he had had a presentiment of what might be. "That young 
man," he had said of the Emperor William II, "will some day play 
his hand, play it at the wrong time and ruin his country," a prophecy 
now literally fulfilled. World-Empire or Dow?ifall was the title of 
a notorious book, issued a few months before the Great War began, 
and received with enthusiasm in the Fatherland. Bemhardi, its 
author, was right. Downfall it was to be. And the measure of that 
fall was in part indicated in the terms of the armistice which Germany 
signed on November 1 1 , and which constituted the first steps toward 
peace. 

THE ARMISTICE 

The first clause in .this document provided for the cessation of 
operations by land and in the air six hours after the signature of the 
armistice. The second clause provided for the "immediate evacua- 
tion of invaded countries ; Belgium, France, Alsace-Lorraine, Luxem- 
burg, so ordered as to be completed within fourteen days," the its main 
evacuated areas to be occupied by Allied and United States provisions 
forces. The significance of the clause was great as it assimilated 
the invasion of Alsace-Lorraine, which had occurred forty-eight years 
before, with the invasion of Belgium, Luxemburg, and France, which 



762 MAKING THE PEACE 

had occurred four years before. In other words, the annexation of 
Alsace-Lorraine by Germany in 1871 was an act of violence and con- 
tinued as such all through the intervening years. The lapse of time 
had not weakened by jot or tittle the rightful claims of France to 
the lost provinces. It was just and fitting that Germany should be 
compelled to disgorge the booty she had acquired by the same process 
in both wars. 

Other clauses provided that Germany must surrender in good con- 
dition much war material, 5,000 heavy and field guns, 25,000 machine 
guns, 3,000 bomb throwers, 1,700 airplanes; also 5,000 locomotives, 
150,000 railroad cars, 5,000 motor cars; also all the German sub- 
marines and 74 German surface warships of various kinds. 

German armies must evacuate all the country west of the river 
Rhine, which should then be occupied by Allied and United States 
garrisons, which should also hold the three principal crossings of the 
Rhine, Mayence, Coblenz, and Cologne, together with the bridge- 
heads and areas at these points of a radius of nearly twenty 
be evacuated niiles. East of the Rhine there was to be a neutral belt 
by the Ger- Qf about six miles extending from the frontier of Holland to 

man army 

that of Switzerland. The upkeep of the troops of occupa- 
tion in the Rhine Province was to be charged to the German Govern- 
ment. Other provisions of the armistice required Germany to 
renounce the treaties of Brest-Litovsk and Bucharest ; to withdraw all 
German troops immediately from territories which were formerly 
parts of Austria-Hungary, Roumania, Turkey; to evacuate East 
Africa, and to repatriate all Allied prisoners of war without the right 
to have her own subjects liberated from foreign prison camps. 
Germany must also make restitution of the Russian and Roumanian' 
gold which she had extracted from those countries and hand this 
over to the Allies to be held in trust until the signature of peace. 
The armistice was to run thirty days and might then be extended. 
The purpose of these various provisions was to render it impossible 
for Germany to renew the war with any hope of success. 

THE EXECUTION OF THE ARMISTICE 

Such were the main provisions of the armistice of November 11. 
No sooner made than the execution began. On November 19, 
Marshal Petain, leading the French army into Metz, the capital of 



IXTERXMENT OF THE GERMAN FLEET 763 

Lorraine, and Germany's strongest fortress west of the Rhine, was 
received with enthusiasm by the people, welcoming back the tricolor 
after forty-seven years of German rule. On November 23, 
Strasburg set its clocks to French time and Marshal Foch, LorraLe" 
Commander in Chief of the Allied Armies, made his triumphal welcome the 
entry, amid frenzied acclamations. Even Germans were forced 
to recognize the actual situation, so unmistakable was the expression 
of Alsatian feeling, now that the opportunit}' for expression had 
arrived. The Cologne Gazette, learning of the reception accorded 
the French when they entered Colmar and Saverne and Wissem- 
bourg and other Alsatian towns, said : "It is better not to deceive 
ourselves with illusions. The hatred of Germany shows itself all 
through Alsace with the violence of a hurricane. The French are 
received, in- a delirium of enthusiasm, as true liberators." 

Not only were Alsace and Lorraine thus recovered for France, in 
one of the most dramatic climaxes of history, but by the terms 
of the armistice the Allied armies had the right to occupy the „,. „ 

The Prussian 

Prussian Rhine Provmce and the left bank and the main Rhine 
crossings of the river. Accordingly three armies of occupation ^''"^"^'^^ ^ 
moved forward, the English to the north and establishing themselves 
in Cologne, the Americans farther south with their center in Coblenz, 
the French south of them, with their headquarters in Mayence. 
The last German soldier was withdrawn beyond the Rhine and Allied 
soldiers passed over it at the three places narried in order to hold the 
bridgeheads and the surrounding areas. 

While this systematic operation was proceeding on land, an event 
of profound significance was occurring on the sea. On November 18 
the German fleet virtually surrendered to the Allied fleets, about fifty 
miles east of the Firth of Forth. Nearly four hundred warships . , 

. '^ Internment : 

of the Allies witnessed this event, having formed in two long of the Ger- , 
columns six miles apart, between which moved the German ""^^ ^^^' 
ships. Naval history records no triumph as complete as this. The 
second naval power of the world, the proud creation of William II 
and modem Germany, had ceased to be, its ships forced to haul 
down their flags in the presence of the enemy and to be interned 
in a British harbor. Germany's sea power was at an end, nor was 
it likel}^ that it would be permitted to revive and to disturb again the 
peace of the world. The German navy had won no laurels and its 
end was ignominious. It was a captive in British waters. Over 



764 



MAKING THE PEACE 



seventy battleships had preferred abject humihation to a test in 
battle. "The Germa!n flag," Admiral Beatty informed the German 
Admiral von Renter, "is to be hauled down at sunset to-day, and is 
not to be hoisted again without permission." 




Central News Photo Service, N. Y. 

Internment of the German Fleet 



THE PROBLEMS IN MAKING PEACE 

An armistice is a mere suspension of hostilities. It is the first step 

toward peace, yet it does not always lead to peace. An armistice is 

concluded quickly under the pressure of circumstances with but little 

^ J.,. time for deliberation. A peace, however, if it is to be enduring 

Conditions r- > > e> 

ofanendur- and particularly after a war that has swept the whole world 
ing peace within its destructive range, must be the product of long con- 
sideration and reflection. It can hardly be hurried and yet hurried 
it is likely to be, necessarily, because of the general desire for the 
speedy resumption of the normal activities of life, and also because 
delay allows time for the dangerous development of all those revolu- 
tionary passions and appetites, those forces of discontent and disin- 
tegration which are generally loosened and accentuated by war. 
After the uncertainties and hazards of war must come the certainties 
and assurances of peace. Moreover, as the iron must be hammered 



SOCIALISTS IN POWER IN GERMANY 765 

into shape when hot, so the changes efifected by war must be speedily 
clinched and codified, before those who dislike those changes have 
recovered sufficiently to be able to oppose and block them. Other- 
wise what was won by the fighters may be lost by the peace-makers. 

Thus after the armistice of November 1 1 and after the execution of 
its immediate provisions for the weakening of the enemy, the in- 
ternment of his fleet, the occupation of a part of his land, men 
turned toward the far more difficult work of making peace. 

On examination, how amazingly complicated the task ! The va- 
riety and gravity of the problems demanding solution far exceeded 
those of the Congress of Vienna. Those problems fell naturally into 
several main classes although those classes were not mutually exclu- 
sive but were, on the contrary, extraordinarily intertwined with each 
other. There was first the problem of Germany. Germany The problem 
must pay, both in territory and in indemnities, for the enormous "^ Germany 
injuries she had done the world. It would be only just if she were to 
pa}^ the entire cost of the war, yet that would be practically impossible 
since the war had cost all the nations probably two hundred billions 
of dollars. But that part of this colossal burden which was not to be 
borne by Germany must be borne by those upon whom she had forced 
the war, and for which they were themselves not responsible. No 
"healing peace" could be made with Germany, because such a peace 
would be flagrantly immoral and unjust. The burden of paying for 
this German-made war must be placed squarely upon the shoulders 
of Germany, as far as that was humanly possible. But the deter- 
mination of this very point presented great difficulties of detail. An 
additional difficulty lay in the fact that the fall of the Empire had left 
Germany in political chaos, rival groups struggling for the control 
hitherto exercised by the now fugitive William of Hohenzollern. 

On November 9, after the armistice terms had been submitted to 
the Germans but before they had been accepted, Prince Maximilian, 
the last Chancellor of the imperial regime, announced that the Kaiser 
had determined to renounce the throne. On that day a republic was 
proclaimed in Munich with Kurt Eisner, a Jewish Socialist, gocJaUgtg ■ 
as head and virtual dictator of the Catholic state of Bavaria, control of 
Also on that day a group of Berlin Socialists demanded of ^^'■™^°y 
Prince Maximilian that a Socialist government be installed. The 
Prince acceded to the demand and transferred his office of Chancellor 
to a prominent Socialist, Frederick Ebert, formerly a saddlemaker 



--v- MAKIXG THE rE.KCK 

psijiv^e, B;it th, - . ^ - - - : 

m Bedin i«ikJ a iLTeat «weti?^> toimMiltx- T^epixtsAt^vi the iwipeni;. 

co-^ ^ --: — r^ :- * ^--r ^ the ocnt«r 09 jwx^x^u 

pi . - to tvAWie A ooij-Kj^nitJoin 

tea ihe i">ev* , 

The S».vi,v. .^ -- , ,. .\>r m^mT W4tr? oa$t the lar^jc^ number ot x\>tt^ 

ift eilecricins to the "ReJoh<;ta$ on aJI ^le panies hi the Empire. T^y 

3JC«r so' . ' " . . - . - - - - ' -^ >^.\ . ' -:> <^j R;ts«A 

h. - ^ , . ., . ~ . , V , , , ,- tAll v>t the 

Houise 05 Konwinon m iq^y. Bm m v^iermAny, «s in Kiis<4A, 

the Sooialists were <iixi«.^i into seve'ral tsotionsi. The Ma- 

ifority S^VMilJ^ts led bT Eben And SoheidemAnn h^d $upjvvrt(>d 

the meASiiTev of th; cV^xT^-nnient dunnii the xcAt, live 

MinoritT SodAli^ts. iAAise, hAd opjx^esed them. Fvvr the 

mcsment the two tAOtioins were t«<<\i in the ^M'emment noxr o?t>Attxi, 

the Eben-HAAse ^ovemr.v '^^ : ot the tex-olution. And i^ly 

cJki^e-n bv The WaI s/>?^r , xxj^h olAinii:i\$ to Aot toi- the 

er. une Ai« isoxiet*; oould be totnied All ox-^r 

Gc. ..,.., . ..„ A tedetAtion, 

T^ oAreer of this revolxirioinATy iijox^mment wai^ de<;tii>ed to bo 
irp.v . / - ■ "^\ ,' . " . . \ -.\ / - '^ ' .-,: 
tb. . ~ . . ,^ ,^ , , , ^ , , ,V 

ownea by the stAte And operated by the ^^tAte, ti"iAt the pi>5?^nt sx'stem 
of privAte ownership A)vi piix-Ate production should ooAse, But it 
WAS ex-ident from the stAtt thAt the mAiority of the n>embers of the 
i>ew gov^niment did not consider the nv>nient oppv^rtuive fvM st> 
sweeping; a chAnire, thAt it it were Attenipred it wouW tAil And leAd 
to A reaciJOin, thAt whAt the pe^^^p^^ denwnded immediAtely was peace. 
And thAt order And a stAble irox-enunent wet^ essentiAl to tl^e secur- 
ing of peAce, thAt the tiandAmentAl cliAnge from a t^in^e of pri\*Ate 
property to one of Sv^- -^nist wAit. 

On the other hAnc SociAlists seemed to tAX'ov siOoiAl- 

izAtkvn tirst Ai>d peAoe AfterwArd ; And there was an extix^me 

ulbtM^M xrini: of the SociAlistSs oAlled the Spanacides, led by KArl 

«ifi the Liobkiiecht And by Rosa Luxemburg, w]-jo x^-ere not intei-ested 

^ in poAce at All but wished to deprix^e the bourjreois olomonts tvf 

the country of all politicAl rights And to estAblisli tl^e proietAviat in 



DISTURBANCES IX GERMANY 767 

complete control. They repre<^nted the same ideas and metnods that 
the Bolsheviki in Russia represented — the rule of a single class, the 
repudiation of democracy, the use of force to effect the immediate 
introduction of thorough-going socialism. 

For a month after the re^'olution the Ebert-Haase government 
was chiefly conspicuoas for its weakness. Claiming to represent the 
nation as a whole, it was imperfectly obeyed even in Berlin itself. 
Meanwhile the Spartacides were preparing to seize centred by vio- 
lence. Through most of December and the early part of January 
there were recurrent outbreaks, riots, and much bloodshed in the 
capital. The Spartacides failed and Dr. Liebknecht and Rosa 
Luxemburg and many others were counted among the dead. For 
the moment, at any rate, Bolshevism was blocked in Germany. 

The Ebert-Scheidemann group now proceeded with its plan of 
having an assembly elected by all men and women of twenty years or 
older, which assembly should frame a new constitution for 
Germany. The elections did not result in a majorit>' for ©f a con- 
any single party. While the Socialists elected more members stitaeirt 
than did any other party, still they were in a minority of the 
whole body. They would not be able to make a purely socialistic 
constitution. But uniting with the Democratic party they would be 
able to organize the state. 

The Constituent Assembly met in Weimar, a small town famous in 
the history of German liberalism and of German literature, the home 
of Goethe and Schiller and Herder and Wieland. A provisional 
constitution was immediately adopted and on February 11, The Weimar 
1 910, Frederick Ebert was chosen first president of the German Assembly^ 
" Reich." A ministry of fourteen members was established, seven 
of whom were Socialists, seven belonging to other parties. The As- 
sembly then entered upon its main task, the elaboration of a p>erma- 
nent constitution for Germany. What the outcome of its delibera- 
tions would be no one could foretell. More serious still was the 
doubt as to whether the Weimar Assembly would be able to make a 
constitution at all or whether, having made one, it would be able to 
impose it up)on Germany. Would the national fermentation subside 
or would the more extreme revolutionists of the Bolshevik tj-pe, the 
Spartacides, be able finally to get control of the state by violent 
methods, sweep the Weimar Assembly aside, and establish Bol- 
shevism ? Time alone could tell. 



768 



MAKING THE PEACE 



EUROPEAN RECONSTRUCTION 

But the reorganization of Germany, important as it might be, was 
only one of a long series of measures that would have to be taken 
before the world could know once more even relative peace of mind. 
The general problem of European reconstruction presented innumer- 
able aspects, bristled with innumerable difficulties, aroused the most 
varied hopes and fears. A mere catalogue of the changes introduced 
and of the questions raised by the world-wide war would be both 




Copyright by Underwood & Undencood, N. Y. 

The Weimar Assembly 
Frederick Ebert delivering his address of acceptance as President of Germany. 

extensive and disheartening, so great would be the labor necessary 
to bring order out of chaos, so essential would be unprecedented 
stores of wisdom and good-will. An adequate survey of these ques- 
tions is impossible here, but one or two of them may be considered. 
Take, for example, the question of national boundaries. In only a 
few cases could the boundaries of the future be the same as those of 
the past. From the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains, from 
Archangel to Salonica, changes in political frontiers had been effected 
by events and must be recognized in practice. A few nations might 



TERRITORIAL PROBLEMS 769 

emerge unaltered from the alchem}- of the war, Spain and Portugal, 
for example, Switzerland, Norway, and possibly Sweden. But where 
else was there another European state that would issue from 
the impending readjustment unchanged? The boundaries of national 
the British Empire, of France, of Germany, of Austria and Hun- boundaries 
gary, of Italy and Russia, of Serbia and Greece and Roumania and 
Bulgaria, of Albania and the Turkish Empire, all these must be 
sketched anew. For the dividing lines of the past had" joined the 
snows of yesterday. The boundaries of Belgium and Holland and 
Luxemburg and Denmark must perhaps undergo rectifications. 
One thing was certain. The map of Europe on which we had been 
brought up had passed forever into the limbo of discarded things 
and men must begin forthwith to familiarize themselves with the 
features of a new strange map. 

And they must become familiar, not only with a new Europe but 
with a new Africa and a new Asia and a new Pacific Ocean as well, for 
German colonies and large parts of the Turkish Empire were destined 
to pass into other hands. 

The territorial problems confronting the world in 191 9 had a far 
wider sweep than those that existed a century earlier upon the down- 
fall of Napoleon. They arose in .large measure from the fact that 
a war begun for the extinction of one small state, Serbia, had resulted, 
not in that extinction, but in the destruction of three great ^^ 

• ° New 

empires, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turke}^, and in the territorial 
defeat of a fourth, Germany, and the overthrow of its twenty- p'"^'^™^ 
two monarchs. IMeanwhile Serbia had emerged from the colossal 
wreckage covered with glorj-, stronger than ever in its national 
integrity, and destined to a great enlargement of its territory. It 
is doubtful if the history of the world contains a more ironical 
page. 

Russia, Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Turkey, in 1914, bulked 
large on the map : Russia, 8,400,000 square miles, or one-seventh of 
the land surface of the globe ; Austria-Hungary, 261,000 ; Germany, 
208,000 ; Turkey, 710,000, or three and a half times as many as the 
German Empire ; in all, 9,579,000 square miles, or more than three 
times the continental area of the United States, excluding Alaska, and 
with a population of two hundred and fifty millions. The Congress of 
Vienna had a small area and a population of thirty-two millions to 
provide for as the result of the Napoleonic wars, namely the Duchy of 



770 MAKING THE PEACE 

Warsaw, which was only a part of former Poland, parts of Germany on 
the left bank of the Rhine, and the Italian peninsula. 

In all this area of more than 9,000,000 square miles, supporting a 
population of a quarter of a billion, no man, at the close of the Great 
War, could point out the boundaries. They had been burned away in 
the consuming heat of the fray. What should be put in their places 
remained to be seen. That the drawing of the new map would prove 
a highly contentious matter was certain beyond peradventure. 

One thing the victors of the war were committed to, namely the 

recognition of two new states, Czecho-Slovakia, and Jugo-Slavia, and 

the restoration of an old state, Poland. The first of these 

Slovakia, would consist of territories formerly belonging to Austria and 

jugo-siavia, Hungary ; the second would consist of Serbia and Montenegro 

and Poland , . . , , ^ , , . , , • , r 

and territories formerly Austro-Hunganan ; the third of ter- 
ritories which for well over a century had been ruled over by Russia, 
Prussia, and Austria. 

Such were a few of the outstanding territorial problems created by 
the war, and there were many others, which must receive solution 
speedily, if peace was to be secured. In most cases the problems were 
intricate, in some obscure, in all sure to arouse the most heated pas- 
sions. There was no remotest possibility that they could be settled 
amicably and in such a way as to leave no ill-feeling. They consti- 
tuted the very stuff of which resentments and hatreds are made. 
Nevertheless settled they must be in one way or another. 



WORLD PROBLEMS 

Not only must Germany be forced to pay for the criminal destruc- 
tion she had wrought in the war, not only must most of the frontiers 
of Europe be redrawn, not only must several new states be erected and 
guaranteed, but the economic development of these new states must 
be assured as well. Arrangements assuring peace, security, 
coionie^s, s'^d good government must be devised for the vast territories 

Russia, severed from the Turkish Empire and for the former German 

colonies ; for Armenia, Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, for 
Constantinople, for the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. Moreover, 
the future of Russia, of China, of Persia, comprising a third of the 
population of the world, must be based upon sound institutions, or 
the peace of the world would be indeed unstable. Again, the whole 



ECONOMIC PROBLEMS 771 

body of international law, flouted by the Central Powers in this most 
lawless of wars, must be painfully and laboriously reconstructed 
anew, for unless nations know their rights and duties, unless international 
they respect them and insist that they be respected by others, ^^^ 
international relations rest on sand, and humanity is at the mercy 
of force and guile. 

In short, in whatever direction one might turn in surveying the 
world on the morrow of the armistice, one could see only a tangle of 
thorny questions demanding answers, a profusion of perplexing prob- 
lems of every description, and the prevalence of passions little 
propitious for a speedy issue out of all these troubles. Four problems for 
years of world war had accumulated a staggering mass of the peace- 
unfinished business which the peace-makers must now confront, 
and through which they must hew their way, though dangers mani- 
fold should encompass them about on every side. The mere task of 
feeding the world was formidable, pressing, and acute, and the neces- 
sary means and methods hard, if not impossible, to find. In no 
country in the world was the economic life of the people normal 
or healthy ; in many countries if was highly abnormal, sadly shat- 
tered and deranged. Agriculture, the basic industry, manufacturing, 
trade and commerce, all had been severely damaged and dislocated 
by the war. A large fraction of the working population had been 
drawn from industry and commerce into the armies of the com- 
batants. Less food was produced at a time when more was needed. 
Markets had been lost or changed. Gradually, under the inexorable 
pressure of the war, industry had been brought more and more under 
the control of the state and directed toward serving the needs of war. 
Industry had been increasingly diverted from private to public 
control. 

With peace would come demobilization, the return of millions of 
men to their homes, seeking their places again in the economic Ufe of 
the various nations. Other millions would be thrown out of work by 
the fact that the great war industries, the munition plants, 
the ship-yards, the various supply services, would now have tion and the 
to curtail production as rapidly as possible. Women had been economic 
employed in enormous numbers in place of the men who had 
gone to the fighting line. 

Now an infinite number of such personal readjustments must be 
made. Herculean were the tasks confronting the governments. 



772 MAKING THE PEACE 

They must so order this necessary transition in the economic world 
from a war basis to a peace basis that there should not be a general 
outbreak of industrial strife in place of the prolonged and desperate 
armed strife of the last four years. The relations of capital and 
labor, always delicate and difficult of adjustment, might easily 
become more troublesome than ever. The existence and the 
urgent character of these numerous economic problems would 
enormously increase the burden resting upon the governments of 
the various countries, and that too at a time when international 
affairs of the greatest variety and gravity were likely to occupy 

of domestic their attention and challenge their ability to the utmost. 

and foreign g^^ ^j^g ^g^j- ]^^^ been a people's war and the domestic in- 
terests of the masses must be taken into account in deter- 
mining the foreign policies of the governments. Internal and 
external affairs could not be separated into compartments and 
treated consecutively. They were intertwined, and government 
programs must have simultaneously in mind both sets of interests, 
those of the masses of the population as well as those of the countries 
as wholes and as members of the family of nations. It might well 
prove in practice that the vastly increased responsibilities resting 
upon statesmen in so troubled and critical a period of history would 
exceed their powers as human beings and that their achievements in 
each of the two great spheres of activity, home affairs, foreign affairs, 
would fall far short of the hopes and expectations of their constit- 
uents, and of themselves. 

This was all the more likely to happen since extravagant hopes and 
expectations had unquestionably been aroused by loose talkers and 
writers, since programs of reconstruction had been hastily brought 
forward in abundance whose realization in definite and concrete 
reforms could onlj^ be accomplished in years, if not in decades, if 
indeed they could ever be accomplished. 

Many were the discordant noises, all declaring that they were 
the authentic voices of the people but frequently sounding sus- 
piciously like the voices of special classes. In the very multiplicity 
of counselors, inevitable, it may be, in an age of democracy and 
a prolific printing press, lay the seed of much confusion and also 
of much future disappointment. 



RETURN OF THE VICTORS 



773 




774 MAKING THE PEACE 

A LEAGUE OF NATIONS 

One of the ideas which had been much discussed during the war 
was that of a new international organization, which should be de- 
signed and empowered to prevent the recurrence of such a hideous 
catastrophe as that which was then devastating and desolating the 
world and which inevitably would leave a heavy, heartless heri- 
prevent war tage of sorrow and of debt for long, long years to come. The 
and main- q],^ organization, or as the critics preferred to say, the old dis- 
organization of the nations had broken down completely and 
was utterly discredited. It must be discarded forever. Any 
attempt to set it up again after the tornado had passed must be 
defeated. The nations must not be allowed to relapse into their 
former habits and methods, habits and methods that had led straight 
to bankruptcy. The old diplomacy, with its alliances, frequently 
secret, with its intrigues, with its general irresponsibility to the 
peoples whose destinies it assumed to control, must give way to a 
new diplomacy, open and above the board,, dedicated to the task of 
eliminating jealousies, rivalries, and hatreds and of introducing and 
encouraging the spirit of friendliness and cooperation among the 
nations. Particularly must war be outlawed. The phrase that this 
was "a war to end war" became current, as did also the words, 
"never again." Both expressed the determination to annihilate 
once for all this immemorial curse of mankind. 

(This indignant and passionate resolve to find a better way to settle 

international difficulties in the future than had ever been found in the 

past enlisted the support of many men in France and England and 

Popular de- America. Societies were formed in those countries for the 

mand for a purpose of arousing public opinion to the feasibility as well 

new interna- ,,.,.,. ^ . . ^ , 

tionai organi- as the desirability of a new organization of human society 
zation which should serve the interests of mankind, should express 

the conscience of mankind. In the United States the League to En- 
force Peace was founded in Independence Hall in Philadelphia in 
June, 191 5, with Ex-President Taft as president. In the following 
year President Wilson gave it as his opinion that, "When the great 
present war is over, it will be the duty of America to join with the 
other nations of the world in some kind of a league for the main- 
tenance of peace." This thought was quite in line with long- 
existing aspirations of the American people, as shown in their enthu- 



THE CRASH OF DYNASTIES 775 

siastic advocacy, at the Hague Conferences, of peaceful methods in 
adjusting international contentions and in the approval they had 
often given to the principle of arbitration. 

But a league of nations that could prevent war or even render it less 
probable could not remain a mere aspiration ; it must be translated 
into a definite organization, with definite powers and obligations, and 
with a machinery for achieving its lofty purpose. It might ^ ^ortin 
easily happen that when the attempt should be made to organization 
embody the aspiration in a concrete institution, grave and ^^^^^^^^ 
perhaps insuperable difficulties would arise. No two persons might 
agree, much less two nations, as to the practical means whereby the 
aspiration could be realized. To desire a constitution is one thing ; to 
draft it is quite another thing, and much more arduous ; and to get 
the draft accepted by those who are to be bound by it may be some- 
thing more formidable still. The cause would not be aided by those 
uncritical and enthusiastic advocates who wrote and spoke as if only 
a league of nations were needed in order to realize the dreams of poets 
and seers throughout the ages, of peace on earth, good-will to all. A 
lush and rampant sentimentalism, expressed in high-sounding phrases, 
would not help things along very far, but would, on the contrary, 
be likely to do more harm than good. 

Such, then, were some of the elements in the general situation re- 
vealed by the suspension of hostilities in November, 191 8. Human- 
ity had narrowly escaped a great and terrible doom. It had passed 
through an intense strain of desperate endeavor ; it had hovered long 
over the brink of failure and disaster. In the end it had achieved 
an astounding victory. Despotism had challenged Kberty for the 
control of the world and despotism had gone under. Reigning houses 
that had ruled for centuries and that had held the world in awe 
had been scattered like chafif before an avenging wind. Hohenzol- 
lern, Hapsburg, Romanoff thrones had crashed to earth and all their 
satellites of petty kings and princes had run madly for cover, thinking 
themselves happy if they escaped with their lives to Switzerland. 
Monarchies became republics overnight throughout central and 
eastern Europe. Autocracies yielded to democracies. Peoples, little 
accustomed by their previous experience or training to govern them- 
selves, were now forced to do so, or to yield to new forms of oppression 
and misrule. The dictatorship of self-appointed radicals might be 
as ruinous to domestic happiness and to foreign peace as the old 



l-fi MAKING THE PEACE 

dictatorships of divine-right monarchs had been. NationaUstic, 
racial, social, economic questions surged up in every direction. 

It was in a world like this that the Allies who had won the war pre- 
pared to meet, in order to confer upon and to determine the terms of 
peace which they would offer their defeated enemies. Having agreed 
among themselves what those terms should be they would then sub- 
mit them to the latter for acceptance. Only after the necessary 
treaties had been made and ratified could the war be considered at an 
end ; only then could the work of reconstruction be seriously begun. 
The place chosen for the Peace Conference was appropriately Paris, 
which Meredith once called "the goddess of the lightning brain," 
"valiant unto death for a principle" and which had been the 
Conference nerve-center of the AUied cause, the throbbing heart of the 
** ^^^^ coalition, from the first day to the last of the racking struggle. 

The first session of the Conference of Paris was held on January i8, 
1919, in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This formal meeting had 
been arranged by the Inter- Allied Supreme War Council and by the 
representatives of the five Great Powers, which had decided. 
Its member- ^.vciorvg Other things, the number of representatives that each 
state should have at the Conference. The United States, the 
British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan were to have five delegates 
apiece, and the British Dominions and India were also to be repre- 
sented, two delegates each from Australia, Canada, South Africa, 
and India and one delegate from New Zealand ; Brazil was given 
three delegates ; Belgium, China, Greece, Poland, Portugal, the 
Czecho-Slovak Republic, Roumania, and Serbia two delegates each ; 
Montenegro, Siam, Cuba, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Liberia, 
Nicaragua, Panama, Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, and Uruguay one 
delegate each. This would make an assembly of about seventy mem- 
bers. While the larger states were given a larger representation, 
each state was to have but a single vote. This preliminary distribu- 
tion of delegates was almost immediately altered, owing to the protests 
of Belgium and Serbia which had fought and suffered from the first 
day of the war to the last and which now found themselves allotted 
only two representatives, whereas Brazil, which had not actually 
fought at all, had three. Belgium and Serbia were forthwith given 
three apiece and the new Kingdom of the Hedjaz was given two. 

President Wilson decided to attend the Conference in person, thus 
departing from the previous practice of the government. He ap- 



THE OPENING OF THE CONFERENCE OF PARIS 777 




778 



MAKING THE PEACE 



pointed as associates on the American delegation, Secretary of State 

Lansing, Colonel Edward M. House, Mr. Henry White, and General 

Tasker Bliss. The Prime Ministers and Foreign Secretaries of 

England, France, Italy attended : namely Lloyd George, Balfour, 

Clemenceau, Pichon, Orlando, Sonnino. The Prime Ministers of 

several British Dominions also attended as did those of Serbia 

and Greece and Roumania, 

Pachitch and Venizelos and 

Bratiano. Belgium sent her 

Minister of Foreign Affairs, 

Hymans ; Czecho-Slovakia 

sent Kramar ; Poland, Dmow- 

ski, and many other men of 

importance and distinction 

were among the delegates. 
The Conference was opened 

by President Poincare of 
The opening France in a masterly 
session address. "Forty-eight 

years ago to-day," he said, 

"on the 1 8th of January, 

1 87 1, the German Empire 

was proclaimed by an army 

of invasion in the Palace of 

Versailles. It was consecrated 

by the theft of two French 

provinces. It was thus, from 

the very moment of its origin, 

a negation of right and, by the 

fault of its founders, it was 

born in injustice. It has ended in opprobrium. 

"You are assembled in order to repair the evil that has been done 

and to prevent a recurrence of it. You hold in your hand the future 

of the world." 

M. Clemenceau was unanimously elected president of the Con- 
ference. Subsequently committees were constituted to investigate 
Its organ- the great subjects which would require settlement and to 
ization report ; committees on Responsibility for the War, on Repara- 

tions, on International Labor Legislation, on Regulation of Ports, 




( , nil a, \ , ,, s J ' inio Service, N. Y. 

Premier Clemenceau 



ORGANIZATION OF THE CONFERENCE 779 

Waterways and Railroads, and on a League of Nations. Of the 
last of these President Wilson was made chairman, having announced 
that his main interest in the work of the Conference was centered in 
the League of Nations and having emphasized the importance of it 
in various speeches delivered in France, England, and Italy before 
the opening of the Conference. 

THE CONFERENCE OF PARIS 

The Conference of Paris, thus formally opened on January 18, 
1919, continued in session throughout the year. The tasks con- 
fronting it were so varied, so difficult, and so complicated, j ^ 
and any solutions that might be reached fraught with con- of its 
sequences so grave, that necessarily progress could be made p''°^^^™^ 
only slowly, if it were to be made wisely. Decisions so momentous 
for the future as these would inevitably be must be the product of 
long and mature consideration or they would leave the world in a 
worse welter than that in which it already found itself. Time was 
of the very essence of the problem, time to study every suggestion 
comprehensively and minutely, time to make innumerable adjust- 
ments between conflicting plans and interests, time to distill a reason- 
able unity of agreement from the daily clash of many minds, time, 
also, to feel the way into the unknown and the untried, for in much 
of its necessary work the Conference would be without light or 
guidance from the past. Yet, and this was the stern paradox of 
the situation, time was the very thing which the world could least 
afford to grant unstintingly, for its most urgent need was to begin 
immediately the stupendous work of rehabilitation, to resume 
speedily its normal activities and to increase their pace, if The need 
body and soul were to be held together. European society, "^ speed 
battered and shattered by the agony of the long struggle, impov- 
erished in every way beyond the possibility of calculation, might 
easily disintegrate still further, might indeed break up into warring 
factions driven by elemental passions, unless it could quickly con- 
centrate its attention upon the problem of recovery. Thus, cir- 
cumstances being what they were, the Conference was compelled 
to work under unfavorable conditions. 

The inner history of the Conference of Paris cannot now be written 
with any assurance of accuracy or completeness. Much of what 



78o 



MAKING THE PEACE 




THE PROCEDURE OF THE CONFERENCE 781 

has gone on within its councils and committees is veiled in utter 
secrecy. What records have been kept of its proceedings have not 
been published or have appeared only in fragmentary or con- 
jectural reports. The parts played by various men or by different 
national delegations have been seen as through a glass darkly or 
have not been seen at all. The miles of newspaper accounts with 
which an impatient and inquisitive world was regaled during that 
crowded year revealed more enterprise and imagination on the part 
of those who composed them than demonstrable knowledge or 
authentic inspiration. Out of the babel of voices that issued from 
the immediate neighborhood of the Conference the still small voice 
of absolute and certified truth was hardly audible. 

But a few things may be stated, of a quite general nature. And 
one is this, that as fai^ as the procedure of the Conference was con- 
cerned history repeated itself in a very striking way. There 
had been, especially in America, much eloquent denunciation with the 
of the Congress of Vienna and President Wilson had made <^°ff ess 

° of Vienna 

himself the spokesman of this mdignation and had demanded 
a new diplomacy which should operate frankly and in the sight of all, 
should make only "open covenants, openly arrived at." But this 
was not to be. The pressure of circumstances, the very nature of 
the task in hand, soon revealed the superficiality of the criticism and 
the necessity of discussion behind closed doors, if anything was to be 
done at all. As a matter of fact the procedure of the Conference 
conformed quite closel}' to that of the Congress of Vienna. To be 
sure the former had several plenary sessions to which the press was 
admitted, whereas the latter had no general sessions. But the 
public meetings of the Conference were merely full-dress parades or, 
at best, only formally ratified decisions reached elsewhere. The 
real work of the Conference, as of the Congress, was done' in numerous 
committees, in informal conversations, and in the secret sessions of 
the representatives of the Great Powers, the "Big Five," or the 
"Big Four" with Japan left out, or the "Big Three" with both Japan 
and Italy missing. No records of these meetings have been given to 
the world. 

THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES 

The immediate and pressing duty of the Conference was to draw 
up the terms of peace which were to be offered Germany. This 



782 MAKING THE PEACE 

must necessarily precede everything else. After several months of 
investigation and discussion agreement was reached and the result 
The treaty was the draft of a treaty, the longest on record, a treaty which 
with would fill a volume about half the size of the present one. This 

°^ was submitted, on May 7, 19 19, to the representatives of 
the German Government, sent to Versailles to receive it. There was 
to be no direct and oral negotiation between the German delegates and 
the members of the Conference, but the former were given a certain 
length of time in which to study the document and to make in writing 
whatever suggestions they might care to. In due course they sub- 
mitted arguments and counter propositions which filled a volume not 
much smaller than the original draft. Most of these propositions 
were rejected by the Conferees, a few changes^ were made to meet the 
German objections, and the amended treaty was then returned to 
them on June 16. Acceptance was required by June 23, under 
threat of a renewal of war and the invasion of Germany. On the 
last day of this stated period the German National Assembly at 
Weimar passed, by a vote of 237 to 138, a resolution to the effect 
that " the National Assembly agrees to the signature of peace." 
On June 28 the Treaty of Versailles was signed by Dr. Hermann 
Miiller, German Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Dr. Johannes Bell, 
and by the representatives of the Allied and Associated Powers, the 
Chinese delegation refusing to sign as a protest against the Shantung 
award which will be described later. This historic event occurred 
in the same Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles where forty- 
eight years before the German Empire had been proclaimed. Time 
had brought its complete revenge. By an appropriate coincidence 
the Treaty of Versailles was signed on the 28th of June, the fifth 
anniversary of the assassination of the Austrian Archduke, Francis 
Ferdinand, at Sarajevo, which had been made to have such amazing 
and lamentable consequences. 

THE COVENANT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS 

The first part of the Treaty of Versailles provides for the creation 

of a League of Nations. The League is to consist, at the outset, of 

Membership two classes of States, first, the original signatories of the 

in the League treaty, thirty- two in all, and secondly, certain others, thirteen 

in number, which are to become members on acceptance of the 



THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS 



783 




784 



MAKING THE PEACE 



invitation to join.^ It will be noted at once that the Central Allies, 
Germany, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey, are not included in 
the League, nor is Russia nor are any of the states which have recently 
claimed independence from Russia ; nor is Mexico to be found among 
those invited to accede. Provision is made for the admission of new 
members by a two-thirds vote of the Assembly, and for the with- 
drawal from the League of any member, after having given a two 
years' notice, " provided that all its international obligations and all 
its obligations under this Covenant shall have been fulfilled at the 
time of its withdrawal." 

The chief bodies created by this Covenant for the accomplishment 
of the purposes of the League are an Assembly and a Council, the 
The latter being, as will be seen, far the more important. Every 

Assembly member of the League is to be represented in the Assembly 
and may have three representatives, or fewer if it desires. Each 
state has, however, but one vote. There is thus equality of voting 
power among all the members, whether large or small. It should be 
noted that in the Assembly the British Empire has collectively six 
votes, for, in addition to the single vote allotted to the Empire as a 
whole, five of the constituent members of that empire have each a 
separate vote, namely Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zea- 
land, and India. 

The Council, on the other hand, represents, not the theoretical 
and assumed equality of states, but their actual and obvious ine- 

1 Original Members of the League 



United States of 


New Zealand 


Hedjaz 


Poland 


America 


India 


Honduras 


Portugal 


Belgium 


China 


Italy 


Roumania 


Bolivia 


Cuba 


Japan 


Serb-Croat-Slovene 


Brazil 


Ecuador 


Liberia 


State 


British Empire 


France 


Nicaragua 


Siam 


Canada 


Greece 


Panama 


Czecho-S!ovakia 


Australia 


Guatemala 


Peru 


Uruguay 


South Africa 


Haiti 








States Invited to Accede 




Argentine Re- 


Denmark 


Persia 


Sweden 


public 


Netherlands 


Salvador 


Switzerland 


Chili 


Norway 


Spain 


Venezuela 


Colombia 


Paraguay 







THE COUNCIL 785 

quality. It is to be a small body of nine, and five of the nine shall 
always be the British Empire, the United States, France, Italy, and 
Japan. In addition to these five there shall be four others to be 
selected by the Assembly " from time to time in its discretion." 
Until the Assembly is organized and makes its first selection the 
Covenant itself determines that these four shall be Belgium, Brazil, 
Spain, and Greece. Each state represented on the Council is to have 
one vote and may not have more than one delegate. Provision is 
made for the possible enlargement of the two classes of members that 
compose the Council, the permanent and the temporary. Any 
member of the League, not a member of the Council, may, however, 
be represented on the Council whenever any matter is under con- 
sideration which specially affects its interests. Nothing is said as 
to who shall decide as to whether that case has arisen. Presumably, 
therefore, it is for the Council itself to decide, not the state which 
considers itself affected. Indeed if the meetings of the Council 
should be secret, and there is nothing in the Covenant that prevents 
their being so, the given state might not know, until a decision had 
been reached by the Council and published, that matters affecting 
it had been under discussion. Its only protection would be the good 
faith and scrupulousness of the members of the Council. 

The Council shall meet as occasion may require and at least once 
a year. No such definite requirement exists in the case of the 
Assembly, which shall meet "at stated intervals and from Meetings to 
time to time as occasion may require." WTio is to decide as to ^^ frequent 
whether the occasion has arisen is not stated. Both Council and 
Assembly may deal at their meetings " with any matter within the 
sphere of action of the League or affecting the peace of the world." 
This is a charter as liberal as the wind, since the history of the past 
appears to show that almost anything may, under favoring condi- 
tions, affect the peace of the world. Except where otherwise expressly 
provided in the Covenant all decisions, either in the Council or in the 
Assembly, must have the unanimous vote of those present, a pro- 
vision which enables any state, even the smallest and most insignifi- 
cant, to veto any contemplated action. Obstruction is easy, and 
unanimity is generally hard to obtain among any considerable 
body of human beings. One can also easily foresee that if, for 
instance, the five Great Powers in the Council wished to adopt a 
policy opposed by any or all of the others they could only do so by 



786 



MAKING THE PEACE 




THE RESTRICTION OF ARMAMENTS 787 

bringing to bear such influence, which might amount to oppression, 
as would force them to yield. Such procedure would of course not be 
conducive to that good will which should be and probably must be 
present if the purpose of the League is to be achieved and its life 
assured. 

The seat of the League is to be Geneva, but the Council may at 
any time establish it elsewhere. There is to be a Secretary General, 
appointed by the Council with the approval of the majority Geneva the 
of the Assembly. A Secretariat, as elaborate as shall be seat of the 
needed, shall be established, to preserve the archives, conduct ^^^^ 
the correspondence and discharge the clerical work of the League, 
its expenses to be apportioned among the members of the League. 

As the motive force behind the creation of the League was the 
desire to find some method of maintaining peace and preventing 
war, as this is, indeed, the avowed purpose of this organization, the 
clauses of the Covenant bearing upon this matter are the supreme 
features of the document, are, in fact, its very pith and marrow. 
Facile idealists had iterated and reiterated in every strain that this 
was the last war, the war to end war. If this consummation devoutly 
to be wished were to be attained it must be through the League ; and 
both before the Covenant was drawn up and after it had been com- 
pleted it was recommended by its sponsors either as actually assuring 
this end or as going a long way toward it. Does a cold examination 
of the document bear out the pleasing prospect ? 

THE PROBLEM OF DISARMAMENT 

The supposed causes of war or kinds of contention that have been 
wont to lead to it in the past are treated in various ways. The 
swollen armaments of Europe have been regarded, at least for a 
full generation, as a menace to peace, an incitement to war, and the 
First Conference of the Hague in 1899 attempted, unavailingly, to 
restrict their growth, to reduce their size. Now, after the most 
devastating war in history the problem is again approached and the 
Covenant devotes an article to it. And that article says that the 
Council of the League shall formulate plans for the reduction ^^^^ reduc- 
of armaments for the consideration and action of the several tionof 
Governments, that after these plans shall have been adopted ^"^^^^"^ 
by the several Governments the limits therein fixed shall not be 



788 MAKING THE PEACE 

exceeded without the consent of the Council. The Governments 
shall also consider how the evil effects attendant upon the private 
manufacture of munitions can be abated and are to exchange frankly 
and fully with each other information as to military and naval pro- 
grams. 

Under this article it is possible to bring about a reduction of arma- 
ments, just as it has been possible to bring it about by international 
agreement at any time during the past twenty years, and no more 
possible now than then. It cannot be said that the Conference of 
Paris has treated this problem any more effectually than did either 
of the Conferences at The Hague. It does little more than point 
out once more the well-known gravity of the problem and promise 
to study it. Indeed one of its stipulations may tend to impede 
rather than to further the process of reduction. While the Council 
is to formulate plans for reduction, no state is obliged to accept those 
Veto of the plans. But if a given state does accept them, then it can 
CouncU never in the future increase the size of its army or its navy 

or its air-service beyond the limits thus fixed and accepted, without 
the permission of the Council, giving its unanimous consent. 
Thus if the Council should recommend for the United States an 
army of 500,000 men and the United States should agree, then, no 
matter how grave or desperate the emergency, the United States 
. could not increase its army without the permission of the eight other 
states, be they European, Asiatic, or American, that are its col- 
leagues on the Council. Such being the situation it is reasonable to 
suppose that each nation will at the very outset, before it is too late, 
fix its standard high enough to enable it to meet all possible contin- 
gencies. Thus this clause seems more likely to operate toward the 
maintenance of maximum or great armaments rather than toward 
their reduction. For the nations will very likely consider that 
that way safety lies and that way only. This clause may defeat 
itself. 

THE PREVENTION OF WAR 

This is, however, but one aspect of the general problem of the 
maintenance of peace, and one of the lesser aspects. More important 
than the reduction of armaments is the prevention or discourage- 
ment of their use. If a nation can be impressed with the fact that 
it is more likely to lose a war which it begins than it is to win it, 



THE TENTH ARTICLE 789 

fewer wars will be begun. This thought has been borne in mind by 
the makers of the Covenant. Article X aims emphatically to give 
this impression. The war has created several new states importance 
and altered the boundaries of many old ones. Article X of Article x 
says, apropos of this: " The members of the League undertake to 
respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial 
integrity and existing political independence of all the members of 
the League. In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat 
or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the 
means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled." The obligation 
of every member of the League is as explicit as any obligation can 
be, the promise is clear and binding to respect and to preserve the 
territorial integrity and the existing political independence of all 
the members of the League. While, apparently, the Council only 
" advises " as to the actual steps to be taken in any given case, the 
obligation to respect and to preserve has been assumed by all and 
must be lived up to, otherwise this article is but a scrap of paper. 
The Conference of Paris put this article into the Covenant in order 
to throw an impregnable buttress around the entire Treaty by 
plainly warning any would-be disturber of the peace that if it should 
attack any member of the League it would be confronted by all the 
members of the League. With such an imposing array pledged to 
block its purpose, it might consider discretion the better part of 
valor, and desist in time. Of course this guarantee could only 
exercise this sobering effect if it was really believed by the would-be 
warring state that it would be actually enforced by the members of 
the League, that, in other words, the latter were sincere and resolute 
in making their promises. 

But the League aspires to prevent wars by adjusting internatioaal 
disputes before they reach the point of explosion. Any war or 
threat of war whether immediately affecting any of the mem- ^^^^ ^^ ^^ 
bers of the League or not is declared a matter of concern to consider any 
the entire League. On the request of any member the Council * ^^* ° ""^^ 
shall be summoned and may take any action it may deem wise to 
preserve the peace. Any member may also at any time bring to 
the attention of the Council or the Assembly any circumstance what- 
ever which threatens to disturb international peace or the good 
understanding between nations upon which peace depends. The 
thought here is that misunderstandings, if freely and fully discussed, 



790 MAKING THE PEACE 

are frequently smoothed away, which is true, but it is also unhap- 
pily true that discussion often sharpens and envenoms differences of 
opinion. 

By another clause the members of the League agree that if any 
dispute shall arise between them likely to lead to a rupture, they 
Arbitration wiU submit the matter either to arbitration or to inquiry by 
or inquiry ^\jq Council and that they will in no case resort to war until 
three months after the award of the arbitrators or the report of the 
Council. This clause, if observed, will prevent sudden attacks and 
allow peacemakers a reasonable time to attempt to adjust the diffi- 
culty. Had Austria followed such a procedure the war of 191 4 
would not have burst so suddenly upon the world and might indeed 
have been entirely avoided. This clause does not prevent war, 
since after the stated time has elapsed, the parties to the dispute may 
commence hostilities, but there is less likelihood of their doing so, 
owing to the intervention of this cooling-off period. The members 
also agree that certain questions of a justiciable nature, as distinct 
from questions of national policy, shall be submitted to a court, 
either one agreed upon by the parties to the dispute or the Perma- 
nent Court of International Justice to be established by the League. 
Disputes as to the interpretation of a treaty, or as to any question of 
international law would come within this category. If one of the 
parties accepts the award of the court, the members of the League 
will not make war upon it, but if one declines to accept it, then 
the Council shall propose the steps that shall be taken to give effect 
thereto. 

If there should arise between members of the League any dispute 

likely to lead to a rupture which is not submitted to arbitration, the 

inve ti tidti ^''^ernbers agree to submit it to the Council, which shall investi- 

by the gate the matter and attempt to effect a settlement. If the 

Council fails it shall publish a report concerning the facts in 

the case and containing its recommendations, so that the world may 

judge and the pressure of public opinion may be brought to bear 

upon the uncomplying party or parties to the conflict. If the report 

of the Council is unanimous, exclusive of the members representing 

the parties to the dispute, the members of the League will not go to 

war with the party complying with its recommendations. If it is 

not unanimous, then the members shall take such action as they shall 

consider necessary. 



THE ECONOMIC BOYCOTT 791 

Such a dispute shall be transferred from the Council to the As- 
sembly in case either party to the dispute requests it. 

Thus we see that the members of the League agree not to go to 
war without first submitting their disputes to one form or another 
of investigation or arbitration. They do not agree necessarily 
to accept the results of the arbitration, nor do the other mem- must precede 
bers of the League not parties to the quarrel agree to force declaration 
them to. They merely reserve the right to act as they see fit. 
Here, then, is no prohibition of war ; but, if war comes, it must come 
only after a certain period of time. It must not come precipitately. 

THE USE OF ECONOMIC WEAPONS 

But supposing any member of the League disregards its obliga- 
tions, breaks its promise to allow an investigation or arbitration, and 
begins a war in the good old way, summarily. What happens Article xvi 
then ? Something quite important, as laid down in Article XVI. and economic 
The offending state shall ipso facto be deemed to have com- p''®^®"® 
mitted an act of war not merely against its enemy, but against all 
the other members of the League as well ; and those other members 
" hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all 
intercourse between their nations and the nationals of the covenant- 
breaking state, and the prevention of all financial, commercial, or 
personal intercourse between the nationals of the covenant-breaking 
state and the nationals of any other state, whether a member of the 
League or not." Here is a tremendous force, if applied, and applied 
it must be " immediately " if the members of the League are to keep 
their promises. This is the economic pressure about which the 
world has heard so much recently as a preventive of war. In addi- 
tion the Council must recommend to the several governments con- 
cerned what effective military, naval, or air forces the members of the 
League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to 
protect the covenants of the League. 

In other words the economic pressure must come, it appears, 
instantly, and the nations have no right to delay or to discuss their 
obligations. These obligations are explicit and peremptory. 
Whether they have any right to refuse the military force that the 
Council shall subsequently " recommend " is not clear. 

Similar provisions look toward investigation and arbitration, 
in the case of disputes between states not members of the League, 



792 MAKING THE PEACE 

or between such states and those states that are members. And it is 
agreed that if a state outside the League begins a war upon one 
within, without first observing the procedure described, then Article 
XVI, that is the economic boycott and possible war, shall be applied 
to. that state by all the members of the League. 

There are other clauses in this Covenant than those which have 
been described. Their purpose is the same, the maintenance of 
Secret peace by the elimination of the causes of war. As, in the 

diplomacy opinion of its framers, secret diplomacy has caused many wars 
in the past, secret diplomacy must be abolished. Henceforth 
there must be no private arrangements between various powers, but 
every treaty or international .engagement entered into hereafter must 
be forthwith registered with the Secretary of the League and pub- 
lished, else it shall not be binding ; and all such engagements hitherto 
made, if inconsistent with the terms of the Covenant, must be abro- 
gated. But says Article XXI : " Nothing in this Covenant shall be 
deemed to affect the validity of international engagements such as 
treaties of arbitration or regional understandings like the Monroe 
Doctrine, for securing the maintenance of peace." 

As territorial greed and colonial rivalries have been prolific causes 
of war in the past the Covenant sets up a new system for disposing 
The system of the lands that have fallen into the hands of the Allies as a 
of mandates result of the war, such as the German colonies and Turkish 
territories. These are not to be divided up among the victors as 
spoils, but are to be regarded as held in trust for the benefit of the 
peoples concerned. The various areas are to be intrusted by the 
League to various members of the League under mandates setting 
forth the degree and kind of authority that they may exercise, guar- 
anteeing certain rights to the natives, and requiring annual reports 
from the mandatories. The mandates may vary according to the 
community. But these vast stretches of the earth are not to be 
annexed to the colonial empire of any state. They are to be held in 
tutelage by the League of Nations until such time as they may be 
able to stand alone. The conduct of any mandatory in the admin- 
istration of the territory assigned to it is subject to the supervision 
of the League, that is, to the enlightened opinion of the world. 
Whether in practice this new system will be found to be merely an 
elaborate disguise for the old system which it is intended to super- 
sede remains of course to be seen. 



THE LEAGUE NOT A WORLD LEAGUE 793 

Such are the main provisions of the Covenant which announces 
a new experiment in international affairs. The Covenant Amendment 
may be amended at any time by a unanimous vote of the of the Cove- 
Council and by a majority of the Assembly. °*° 

The League of Nations is the method proffered by the Conference 
of Paris to a heart-sick world to enable it to seek an issue out of some 
of its troubles. The world is ready for an experiment in the closer 
cooperation of the nations, and if the machinery provided here 
should prove to be too clumsy and inefficient to accomplish any- 
thing important, if the experiment fails, as it easily may, other 
experiments will subsequently be tried. Whether the unanimity of 
voting required in most matters, and other restrictions, are so serious 
as to lead merely to endless talk and contention, with subsequent 
paralysis, or whether the powers of the League are so great as to 
threaten the cherished rights of the nations that compose it, will be 
better known in the future than it is to-day. 

One thing, however, is entirely clear at the present moment. 
What has been provided is not a World League. It is a League of 
the Conquerors of Germany, with a number of small and ^j^^ ^53™^ 
medium-sized neutrals associated with them, but occupying not a world 
the lower places in the synagogue. This is a hopeful aspect of ^*^"^ 
the matter, since it respects the continuity of history and attempts 
no violent innovation in the midst of an unfinished chapter. For 
the conquest of Germany is the great and imperative task of the age, 
a conquest that can be assured only by the enforcement of the 
Treaty of Versailles, which will be a matter of many years. In the 
constitution of the League and in the other sections of the treaty 
are numerous provisions linking the future with the immediate past, 
and conditioned by the character of that past. For the framers of 
these documents have correctly seen that the past is not secure 
until the future is guaranteed. The conquerors of the Central 
Powers have therefore wisely and necessarily resolved to project 
their league of victory into the future, until the great work, into 
which they were unwillingly forced by Germany, shall have been 
completed. 

POLITICAL CHARACTER OF THE LEAGUE 

We ought not to be deceived any more by appearances than by 
names. While forty-five nations will constitute the League, if all 



794 MAKING THE PEACE 

accept who are invited, yet it would be unnecessarily naive for any 

one to suppose that there is any general diffusion of real power 

among the forty-five. Look over the list of the contemplated 

nance of the associates and you see a large number of negligible quantities. 

Five Great ^he great military art of camouflage, so richly developed 

Powers 

by the war, has gone over into diplomacy, and may be 
observed in the Treaty, the great art, that is, of self-protection 
through deception. The chief authority in the League is the Council, 
a body consisting always of the five great Allied states and of four 
others chosen from time to time. What is this but the old Concert 
of Power, slightly disguised, familiar to every student? The old 
Concert which we meet from time to time in European history 
accomplished good, accomplished evil, and frequently broke up under 
the strain of internal dissension, only to reappear under favoring 
conditions. The old concert was entirely European; the new is a 
World-Concert for the simple reason that the nineteenth century 
created two additional great states, the United States and Japan, 
which cannot be ignored and which have become entangled in Euro- 
pean affairs. It was a Concert which liquidated Europe after the 
Napoleonic wars, the nearest parallel to the recent war which history 
has to show. And a Concert of Powers is liquidating the world to-day 
and is installing itself securely in the new international organization 
with its eye intently fixed upon the future, and this is of good omen 
as it corresponds to the realities of the situation, is grounded in the 
actual facts of contemporary life, and seems a guarantee of normal 
development in the future. 

Of course the Council of the League will be exposed to the same 
dangers as the Concert. It will consist of politicians or, if one pre- 
Character of fers, of Statesmen, as did the latter. The Council is a political 
the Council ^^d diplomatic, not a judicial, body, and its decisions will, it is 
quite safe to prophesy, be what political decisions usually are, man- 
ifestations either of power or of the spirit of compromise, that is, of 
give and take. Only in matters that are referred to an International 
Court will the process of settlement be judicial. No one should be 
so innocent as to suppose that the Council will consist of men purely 
unselfish, absolutely disinterested, without passion, supremely wise. 
In other words, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Whether 
the League will work well will not be known until the experiment 
has been tried. The art of making a political machine that shall 



INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION 795 

operate only to the advantage of men and never to their disadvantage 
is still a profound mystery. That there is a great need for a better 
ordering of the international relations of the world does not itself 
prove that a better ordering is practicable, but it does constitute a 
challenge that cannot be ignored. And the lessons of the war are 
distinctly encouraging in this regard. For during it the most varied 
kinds of intimate and fruitful cooperation were carried through 
successfully, knitting the Allied nations into the union which in the 
end gave irresistible strength, and the incredible climax was reached 
when the armies of old and proud nations, like England and America 
and Italy, were placed unreservedly under the command of a French 
general. The analogy between military life and civil life is, of 
course, not complete. There are profound and fundamental differ- 
ences, but the reference suggests that we do not yet know the possible 
limits of the cooperative spirit. 

The League may fail egregiously. It will consist, as do parlia- 
ments and congresses, of men wafted up by favoring breezes into 
the seats of the mighty. There will be politics in the League just 
as there have been in the Conference of Paris which has fashioned it, 
and, in politics, one finds personal and sectional ambitions, com- 
promise, log-rolling — and idealism. The exact proportions in 
which the various elements are to be mixed in any given case defy 
prognostication, but mixed they will be at Geneva, as in Paris, 
London, Rome, Washington, and Tokio. 

But the League may succeed moderately or greatly if sufficient 
stores of wisdom and of character are enlisted in its service. It will 
fail and will be quickly wrecked if it tries to run counter to the ^j^g ^^^^_ 
deep, underlying forces of the age, such as the spirit of nation- sites of 
ality, one of the most legitimate and beneficent forces active in 
the modern world, and censurable and hateful only when grossly 
perverted and distorted. It will also fail, and be angrily and con- 
temptuously discarded, if it does not achieve that " international 
peace and security ", which is given in the preamble as a primary 
reason for its existence, and the passionate craving for which has 
furnished the impetus for its creation. 

THE TREATY WITH GERMANY 
Of the four hundred and forty articles of the Treaty of Versailles 
only twenty-six are devoted to the League of Nations. The re- 



796 MAKING THE PEACE 

mainder set forth the measures and precautions which the Allied 
world has seen fit to adopt in regard to Germany, the determina- 
Great length ^^°^ '^^ ^^^ future boundaries of that country, the political 
of the changes in Europe which she must recognize, stipulations in 

reaty regard to her future military organization, and in regard to 

penalties and reparations. Elaborate sections of the Treaty concern 
financial and economic matters, German colonies, ports, waterways 
and railways, labor organization and legislation. These sections 
represent the price that Germany must pay for her wanton, criminal 
adventure, for the unexampled losses, the immense sacrifices, the 
incredible exertions which her madness imposed upon the world. 
Considering the infinite complexity of the problems raised by the war, 
the multitudinous details that must be studied and adjusted as a 
result of a struggle that left no human being, no corner of the world, 
unaffected, considering the enormous ravages, the cataclysmic de- 
struction, which must somehow be repaired if that is possible, and 
considering all those necessary and fruitful human and social rela- 
tionships which have been violently torn asunder and which must be 
joined again, the wonder is that the Treaty of Versailles is not far 
longer than it is. 

A summary of that Treaty, every word of which is weighed, each 
part of which is closely intertwined with every other, and condi- 
tioned by it, cannot be attempted here. The reader should care- 
fully study the entire document if he would see how grave a thing it 
is to tear up the charters of the world, to throw into the caldron 
the established and beneficent institutions, relations, and usages of 
men. Only a few of the more conspicuous features of the Treaty 
can be described in this chapter. 

THE BOUNDARIES OF GERMANY 

The boundaries of Germany are drawn anew. She loses Alsace- 
Lorraine, which reverts to France. Slight changes are provided for 
Loss of along the Belgian frontier. Provision is made for the people 

Alsace- of the larger part of Schleswig to resume their former connec- 

orraine ^.^^ \^[th the kingdom of Denmark if they so desire. For the 

purpose of discovering their sentiments Schleswig is divided into two 
zones, and plebiscites are to be taken in each, conducted, not by the 
German authorities, but under the authority of an International 



RETURN OF ALSACE-LORRAINE 



797 




798 MAKING THE PEACE 

Commission. The northern zone will vote as a unit and if the ma- 
jority favors reincorporation in Denmark it is to occur forthwith. 
. The voting in the southern zone will be by communes and the 

Sciil6swic 

Five Great Powers shall, after the plebiscite, draw the bound- 
ary line between Schleswig and Germany, a line which shall take 
into account the result of the voting and also geographical and 
economic conditions. Germany agrees to abide by their decision. 
In these plebiscites, as in others provided for by the Treaty, women 
are to vote as well as men. 

Thus another of the wrongs committed by Bismarck and his 
policy of blood and iron is to be righted. The territorial booty of 
Logg Qf the war of 1864 must be, in part, disgorged, just as that of the 

Polish war of 1870 must be. In another region, in the eastern part 

provincos ^^ Prussia, wrongs committed by Frederick the Great a cen- 
tury and a half ago are also to be righted. Germany recognizes 
the Republic of Poland, that miracle of our times, and extensive 
areas of Prussia are renounced in favor of this old, new state. 
Some of these are ceded outright by the Treaty and in others plebis- 
cites are to be held to determine the wishes of the people. Thus in 
a part of Upper, or Southern, Silesia, seized by Frederick in his 
famous raid of 1740, and in a part of the province of East Prussia 
the exact boundaries will not be known until the people have been 
consulted and until the Five Great Powers shall have finally deter- 
mined the frontier. But whatever the outcome is, Germany agrees 
to abide by it. Not all of Frederick's annexations will be lost — 
only those parts which are mainly Polish in race and in sentiment, 
but the eastern contours of Germany will differ greatly from those 
of the past. In this redrawing of the map of Germany two other 
changes must be noted. Germany renounces, in favor of the Five 
Great Powers, Memel, in the extreme northeastern tip of Prussia, 
and agrees to accept whatever disposition may be made of it. She 
also renounces in their favor the city of Danzig, which is henceforth 
to be a free city and to be placed under the League of Nations. 
Danzig had belonged to the former kingdom of Poland, but had been 
seized by Prussia in the second partition in 1793. The Poles, both 
Danzig a because they regarded this city as rightfully theirs and also 
free city because it was their only possible seaport, pleaded for its in- 

clusion in the new state, but the Conference of Paris did not grant it 
to them. It took Danzig from Germany, but did not give it to 



THE SAAR BASIN 799 

Poland, but it undertook to negotiate a treaty between the Free City 
and the RepubUc of Poland whereby the latter might include the 
former within its customs boundaries and might enjoy its use as a 
port, quite without restriction. The executive of the Free City, under 
the League of Nations, is to be a High Commissioner appointed by 
the League. Danzig is connected with Poland by a strip of terri- 
tory, a " corridor " which thus separates the main body of the Prus- 
sian state from that part which lies east of the corridor, namely what 
is left to Prussia of the province of East Prussia. These terms of the 
Treat}^ have given great dissatisfaction both to Germany and to 
Poland. 

Thus, by the Treaty, Germany has lost probably five million of her 
population, but, in the main, she has only lost those peoples con- 
quered by force and belonging to other nationalities. She has only 
lost, or is to lose, her French and Danish and Polish subjects. The 
liberation of these peoples is one more triumph of the powerful and 
unconquerable spirit of nationality, a force which has greatly trans- 
formed Europe since the French Revolution and which is still trans- 
forming it. 

In still another region Germany has lost control, at least pro- 
visionally, of territory that was hers before the war, of the Saar 
Basin, contiguous to France. This region, in part, had be- TheSaar 
longed to France, but had been acquired by Prussia in 1815. ^^sia 
It is not to be returned outright to France. Like Danzig since 1793, 
it has become Germanized and as the framers of the Treaty of Ver- 
sailles have professed the principle that peoples must not be sub- 
jected to alien states, a principle to which they have conformed more 
or less in their actual conduct, a quite complicated arrangement has 
been worked out in regard to the Saar Basin, a region having a Ger- 
man population of about six hundred thousand. As compensation 
for the destruction of the coal mines in northern France and as part 
payment toward the total reparation due from Germany for the 
damage resulting from the war, Germany cedes to France in full and 
absolute possession, with exclusive rights of exploitation, the coal 
mines of the Saar Basin. But Germany does not cede the terri- 
tor}^ itself to France, only the mines. But in order that the French 
may have complete freedom in working these mines, without, how- 
ever, extending their sovereignty over the territory itself and over 
its German population, which, say the conferees of Paris, would 



8oo MAKING THE PEACE 

create or tend to create another Alsace-Lorraine with the Germans 
this time as the victims, the framers of the Treaty have evolved 
elaborate and intricate arrangements for the immediate future of the 
Saar. Germany renounces, not the territory, but the government 
of the territory to the League of Nations, which is for fifteen years to 
act as trustee for the inhabitants, who at the end of that period shall 
have the right to indicate by a plebiscite under which sovereignty 
they prefer to be, whether that of Germany, or that of France, or 
whether they wish to continue indefinitely under the League of Na- 
tions. The voters having indicated their desires, the League of 
Nations shall finally decide on the sovereignty under which the 
territory is to be placed. Meanwhile, during those fifteen years the 
government shall be in the hands of a commission of five representing 
the League and appointed by it. Within the territory of the Saar 
Basin this Governing Commission shall have all the powers of gov- 
ernment hitherto belonging to the German Empire or to Prussia or 
to Bavaria. 

Not only does Germany agree in this Treaty to recognize the inde- 
pendence of Poland, but also that of the Czecho-Slovak Republic 
in whose favor she renounces certain territories in Silesia. 
to be She also recognizes the independence of Austria with whatever 

annexed to boundaries may be determined upon by the Five Great Powers 

Germany i a ■ ^ ■> 

and Austria. She agrees that this independence shall be in- 
alienable, except with the consent of the Council of the League of 
Nations. This means that Austria shall not be joined with Germany, 
even if the people of both countries desire it, save with the approval 
of the nine states represented in the Council. Germany also agrees 
to respect as permanent and inalienable the independence of all the 
territories which were part of the former Russian Empire on August i , 
1914, and she undertakes to recognize all treaties that maybe entered 
into by the Five Great Powers with states now existing or coming 
into existence within former Russia and to recognize the frontiers 
of any such states as determined therein. She also agrees to the 
abrogation of the Brest-Litovsk Treaties and all other agreements 
she has made with Bolshevist Russia. Outside of Europe she not 
only cedes her colonies to the Five Great Powers, but she renounces 
treaty rights and privileges which she has hitherto enjoyed in Mo- 
rocco and Egypt, and she recognizes the French Protectorate of the 
former, the English Protectorate of the latter, and abandons all 



RESTRICTION OF GERMAN MILITARY POWER 8oi 

rights of intervention. She renounces, in favor of Japan, all the 
rights and privileges she has enjoyed in China since 1898, that is, her 
rights in the province of Shantung. 

DESTRUCTION OF GERMAN MILITARISM 

Such are Germany's territorial losses as set forth in the Treaty of 
Versailles. Another important section of the Treaty severely limits 
her freedom of action in another field, in the field of her greatest 
interest hitherto. If the terms of a treaty can prevent Germany 
from again becoming a great military and naval power, able to 
menace the world, prevented she will be. In great detail the Treaty 
determines just what forces she may have in the various war services, 
just what equipment. In a general way these clauses reduce the 
armed power of Germany to a standard hitherto reached and ex- 
ceeded by many a small state. If these clauses are enforced Ger- 
many will no longer be able, by rattling her shining saber, to alarm 
or terrify her neighbors. Any campaign that she may undertake 
against them can only be economic or political and propagandist, 
not military. 

After 1920 her army may not exceed one hundred thousand men, 
including not more than four thousand officers. Universal com- 
pulsory military service is abolished and the German army The German 
may only be constituted and recruited by voluntary enlistment, *™*y 
and the period of service is made so long as to act as a deterrent. 
Privates and non-commissioned officers must enlist, if they enlist 
at all, for twelve consecutive years ; officers for twenty-five. Not 
more than five per cent of these may be discharged for any reason 
in an}^ one j^ear before the expiration of their term of service. 

These clauses reveal the fact that the authors of them had learned 
one of the minor lessons that history has to teach. Napoleon, after 
his conquest of Prussia in 1806, forbade that the Prussian army 
should henceforth number more than forty-two thousand men. The 
Prussian Government accepted the requirement under compulsion, 
but it hit upon the ingenious device of having these men serve with 
the army only a short time, only long enough to learn the essentials 
of the soldier's life. Then they would be mustered out and others 
would pass through the same training. By this method several 
times forty-two thousand men received a military training and were 



802 



MAKING THE PEACE 




MILITARY PROVISLONS 803 

able to take the field in those final campaigns which landed Napo- 
leon at St. Helena. The framers of the Treaty of Versailles intended 
that, in this respect at least, history should not repeat itself. But 
not feeling sure that the German of to-day might not in his turn hit 
upon some device of gaining indirectly what he is forbidden to get 
directly, they have provided that " educational establishments, uni- 
versities, societies of discharged soldiers, shooting or touring clubs, 
and, generally speaking, associations of every description, what- 
ever be the age of their members, must not occupy themselves with 
military matters " and must, in particular, neither instruct their 
members nor allow them to be instructed or exercised in the pro- 
fession or use of arms. Nor may government officials, such as cus- 
toms officers, forest guards, coastguards, or the local police, be as- 
sembled for military training. All military schools not absolutely 
necessary for the training of the officers of the army are abolished, 
as is also the Great General Staff, which has bulked so large in the 
thought and imagination of mankind during recent years. 

Thus Germany may henceforth produce only a certain number of 
soldiers. She may also produce only a certain amount of munitions 
and equipment and that amount is laid down in tables priuted in production of 
the Treaty. It is also provided that the manufacture of arms war material 
and munitions or any war material shall be carried out only in ■^^^*"'=*^ 
factories approved by the Five Great Powers. AH other such estab- 
lishments shall be closed within three months of the coming into 
force of the Treaty. Moreover importation into Germany of arms, 
munitions, and war material of every kind is strictly prohibited, as 
also is the exportation of such products from Germany. Nor may Ger- 
many manufacture or import asphyxiating, poisonous, or other gases, 
nor armored cars or tanks. 

Germany is forbidden to maintain or to construct any fortifications 
either on the left bank of the Rhine or on the right bank in a zone ex- 
tending fifty kilometers or about thirty-six miles east of the uofortifi- 
Rhine. All existing fortresses and fortified works within that cations on the 
area and also west of the river are to be disarmed or dismantled. 

The German navy is to be restricted to six battleships of the large 
type, six light cruisers, twelve destroyers and twelve torpedo boats 
and the personnel of the navy must not exceed fifteen thou- The German 
sand men, inclusive of officers, who must not exceed fifteen "^^ 
hundred. The warships interned under the armistice of November 



804 MAKING THE PEACE 

1 1 are to be surrendered. All German submarines are to be handed 
over to the Five Great Powers, and Germany is forbidden to acquire 
in the future any submarines, even for commercial purposes. 

The fortifications, military establishments and harbor of Helgo- 
land are to be destroyed, nor shall they ever be reconstructed. The 
Kiel Canal shall be free and open to the commercial and war vessels 
of all nations at peace with Germany on terms of entire equality. 

The armed forces of Germany must not include any military or 

naval air forces. The manufacture or importation of aircraft, or 

„ . , engines for aircraft, is forbidden in all German territory. All 

No air forces 

material of this nature already existing in Germany must, with 
a slight exception, be delivered over to the Five Great Powers. 

Such are the drastic provisions, which, if executed, will destroy 
that German militarism which has cost the world so intolerable a 
price. But how are they to be enforced? The Treaty provides 
that the Five Powers shall establish Inter-Allied Commissions of 
Control which shall be charged with the duty of seeing to their com- 
plete execution by the German authorities. These Commissions 
may establish their organizations in the capital of Germany, may 
proceed the«iselves, or send agents, into any part of Germany, may 
demand whatever information or aid they may desire of the German 
Government, which shall bear all expenses connected with the de- 
livery, the destruction, the dismantling, the demolition provided for 
by the Treaty. 

The Treaty also provides another novelty in the art of terminating 
wars which may in the future have a tendency to restrain would-be 
William II disturbers of the general peace and to cause them to think 
to be tried twicc before gaily plunging ahead. It publicly arraigns Wil- 
liam II, formerly German Emperor, " for a supreme offence against 
international morality and the sanctity of treaties" and it announces 
that a court shall be constituted to try him, consisting of five judgesi 
one appointed by each of the following, the United States, Great 
Britain, France, Italy, and Japan. It shall be the duty of this court 
to fix the punishment it may consider appropriate " with a view to 
vindicating the solemn obligations of international undertakings and 
the validity of international morality." Also military tribunals are 
to be established to try other persons accused of having committed 
acts in violation of the laws and customs of war, such persons to be 
handed over by the German Government on request to the Allies, 



THE REPARATION COMMISSION 805 

which Government also agrees to furnish whatever documents and 
information may be needed. 

REPARATION 

There is another and extremely important section to this Treaty, 
that concerning the reparation which Germany must make for the 
enormous economic injury she has inflicted upon her enemies. By 
the Treaty she accepts the responsibility of herself and her asso- 
ciates for all the loss and damage to the Allied governments and the 
Allied peoples caused by the war. But as the payment of so mon- 
strous a sum is quite beyond her and their resources, she is to escape 
from a large part of what would be only a just penalty. But she 
definitely undertakes to make compensation for all the damage done 
to the civilian population of her enemies. This means that she must 
make good in money and in materials and in labor the desolation and 
destruction she has caused, must help restore the ravaged lands to 
their former condition, rebuild the demolished villages and cities, 
restore the loot she has carted away to Germany, replace tool for 
tool, factory for factory, ship for ship, and, in general, work and pay 
for the rehabilitation of the countries she has overrun and devas- 
tated. But how much does all this mean? Obviously this can 
not be determined off-hand, but only after an exhaustive investi- 
gation. The Treaty provides, consequently, that the amount of the 
above damage for which compensation is to be made by Germany 
shall be determined by an Inter-Allied Commission to be called the 
Reparation Commission, which shall make the necessary inves- 
tigation and shall notify the German Government on or before Reparation 
May I, 192 1, as to the extent of her obligations. This Com- Commission 
mission will be one of the chief agencies for the execution of the 
Treaty. It will sit in Paris and, no doubt, its activities will run 
for many years. It will consider from time to time the resources 
and the capacities of Germany, and will issue specific demands and 
will indicate how they are to be satisfied. 

In order to enable the Allied powers to proceed at once to the 
restoration of their industrial and economic life, pending the full 
determination of their claims, Germany shall pay over to the Germany's 
Reparation Commission before May i, 1921, twenty billion initial 
gold marks, normally about five billion dollars. What p^^™®"* 
moneys she must pay beyond that remain to be determined, but 



8o6 MAKING THE PEACE 

may easily run up to a hundred million marks. Germany also 
agrees to the direct application of her economic resources to repa- 
ration, that is, agrees to deliver ships and coal and dyestufifs and 
chemical products and live stock and other things to her enemies, the 
amounts in general to be determined by the Commission — all these 
commodities being credited to her reparation account. For in- 
stance, as an illustration, she is to hand over all her merchant ships 
of 1600 tons and upward, half of her ships of a tonnage between 1000 
and 1600 tons, a quarter of her tonnage of steam trawlers and a 
quarter of her tonnage of other fishing boats ; and in addition she 
must, for a period of five years, build ships for the Allies to the 
amount of 200,000 tons a year. All this is retribution for her merry 
years of submarine piracy. " A ton for a ton " may well take its 
place alongside " a tooth for a tooth " as an expression indicating 
the operation of even-handed, methodical justice among men. 

This equitable principle is to be applied in the realm of sentiment 

and the human spirit, as well as in the realm of matter. Germany 

undertakes to furnish to the University of Louvain manuscripts, 

printed books, maps, corresponding in number and value to those 

destroyed in the burning by Germany of the Library of Louvain. 

She is to restore to France certain archives and diplomatic papers, 

Restoration trophies and works of art, carried away from France by the 

of French German authorities in the course of the war of 1 870-1 871, and 

^^^ particularly the French flags taken in that war. She must 

give back to the King of the Hedjaz the original Koran of the Caliph 

Othman, stated to have been presented to Emperor William II by 

his friend the Sultan. And certain works of art must be restored to 

Belgium also. 

COMMENTS OF LLOYD GEORGE ON THE TREATY 

Such are a few of the provisions of this monumental treaty. In 
presenting it to Parliament a few days after it was signed the British 
Premier Lloyd George said in discussing this very reparation section 
just described : " I do not think any one can claim the terms imposed 
constitute injustice to Germany unless he believes justice in the war 
was on the side of Germany." The terms of the Treaty in some 
respects were terrible, he said, but terrible were the deeds which 
justified them, and still more terrible would have been the consequences 



THE BRITISH PREMIER ON THE TREATY 807 

had Germany triumphed. " The world is rocking and reeling under 
the blow that failed. If the blow had succeeded the liberty of 
Europe would have vanished." Concerning the territorial ^j^^ 
terms of the Treaty Lloyd George declared that the territory territorial 
taken from Germany was a matter of restoration, a restoration *^™^ ^"®' 
of Alsace-Lorraine, taken by force from the land to which its people 
were deeply attached, a restoration of Schleswig, the taking of which 
he described as the "meanest of HohenzoUern frauds, robbing a 
helpless country on the pretence that they were not doing it and then 
retaining the land against the wishes of the population," a restora- 
tion of a Poland torn to bits by Russian, Austrian, and Prussian 
autocracy and now reknit under the flag of Poland. " They are all 
territories," he added, "which ought not to belong to Germany." 

And he also said concerning other aspects of the Treaty : " Having 
regard to the uses Germany made of her army there is no injustice 
in scattering and disarming it. If the Allies had restored the col- 
onies to Germany after the evidence of the ill treatment of the na- 
tives, and the part the natives have taken in their own liberation, 
it would have been a base betrayal. Then take the trial of Trial of the 
those responsible for the war. If wars of this kind are to be pre- Raiser just 
vented, those personally responsible for them, who have taken part 
in plotting and planning them, should be held personally responsible. 
Therefore, the Entente decided that the man who undoubtedly had 
the primary responsibihty, in the judgment, at any rate, of the 
Allies, should be tried for the offenses he committed in breaking 
treaties he was bound to honor, and by that means bringing on the 
war. It was an exceptional course, and it's a pity it was, because if 
it had been done before there would have been fewer wars." 

The Premier proceeded to argue that this was not a vengeful 
peace, that it was not vengeance " to take every possible precaution 
against a recurrence of the war and to make such an example J^^^ ^ 
of Germany as will discourage ambitious rulers and peoples vengeful 
from ever again attempting to repeat this infamy. The Ger- ^^^'^^ 
man people approved the war, and, therefore, it was essential in the 
terms to show, if nations entered into unprovoked wars of aggression 
against their neighbors, what lies in store for them." 

It might well be considered ominous that even before the Germans 
had signed this Treaty in the famous Hall of Mirrors at Versailles on 
June 28, 1919, two of its explicit terms had been already broken. 



8o8 MAKING THE PEACE 

On the very eve of signature the Germans had sunk the fleet that 

lay interned since the armistice in Scapa Flow, thus avoiding the 

German surrender provided by the Treaty. And in Berlin the French 

breaches of flags captured by the Germans in 1870 had been burned in 

the Treaty o i ^ / 

front of the statue of Frederick the Great in Unter den Linden. 
German officers and soldiers of the Guard Cavalry Division had 
entered the War Museum and taken out the flags, already packed 
for delivery to the French. They had soaked the flags in gasoline 
and as they had tossed them into the flames the crowd had sung 
" Deutschland iiber AUes." While the Treaty had not been signed 
at the time these incidents occurred, yet the German Government 
had already announced that it would accept the terms which had 
been submitted to it weeks before. The world was given a sufficient 
hint that breaches or attempted breaches of the Treaty might be 
confidently expected in course. 



RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY 

The fate of the Treaty now lay with the parliaments of the various 
countries to which it was submitted for ratification. With it were 
coupled in the case of the English, French, and American parlia- 
ments certain treaties between the United States and France and 
between France and Great Britain by the terms of which the two 
powers agree to move immediately to the aid of France if any un- 
provoked act of aggression is made against her by Germany. These 
treaties were signed at Versailles on the same day as the treaty with 
Germany and were designed to reassure the French, who did not feel 
that an untried and uncertain League of Nations offered them 
Treaties a sufficient protection against a neighbor much larger than 

bctwGGH 

France, Eng- France and quite likely at the opportune moment to try to 
land, and the wipe out the humiliation of 1 91 8 by beginning a war of revenge, 
states It was provided that this virtual Franco- Anglo- American Al- 

liance should remain in force until the Council of the League of 
Nations should decide that the League itself assured sufficient pro- 
tection; 

It was provided in the Treaty of Versailles that it should come 
into force as soon as the ratifications of Germany on the one hand 
and of three of the Five Great Powers on the other should have been 
deposited in Paris. The German National Assembly ratified on 



THE ATTITUDE OF AMERICA 809 

July 9, by a vote of 208 to 115, 99 deputies refusing to vote. A few 
days later the British Parliament approved it, and also the Anglo- 
French Treaty, with practical unanimity, after only a few days' de- 
bate. The French Parliament ratified in October and the Italian 
Government announced its adhesion in the same month. The neces- 
sary number, therefore, had ratified. Would the enforcement of the 
Treaty begin forthwith? Would the League of Nations begin 
immediately to function ? 

AMERICA AND THE PEACE 

The European nations were reluctant to set the new machinery in 
motion without the cooperation of America. And in America the 
Treaty hung lire. There was but slight opposition among the ^ osition 
people of the United States to that part of the Treaty which to the Treaty 
directly concerned GermanJ^ The overwhelming opinion was *° America 
that the terms imposed upon her were just and necessary. Only 
three of these four hundred clauses and more aroused any vigorous 
protest and those were the three that concerned the disposition of 
Shantung, the transfer of Germany's rights and privileges in that 
Chinese province to Japan. But the twenty-six articles concerning 
the League of Nations precipitated a long and bitter debate, both in 
the Senate and among the people. AH through the summer and fall 
of 1919 the League was the theme of constant discussion, increasing 
in intensity and acrimony as it progressed. Both in its fundamental 
principles and in its special provisions it was attacked and defended 
in many able speeches. The lines of cleavage were mainly between 
the Democratic Administration supporters and the Republican op- 
position, which was in a slight majority in the Senate. Every shade 
of opinion was expressed during the course of the debate. There 
were those who favored accepting the Treaty exactly as it stood 
without the elimination of a letter or a phrase. There were those 
who favored rejecting it outright and in its entirety. And between 
these extremes were men who wished a few changes and those 
who wished many. Of these some wished to effect the changes 
through amendments, which would involve resubmission of the entire 
Treaty to the Peace Conference, and some wished to make them 
through " reservations," which, they held, would not require' resub- 
mission. 



8io MAKING THE PEACE 

On September lo, 19 19, the Committee on Foreign Relations 
reported the Treaty to the Senate with several amendments and 
Amendments ^°^'" reservations recommended by the Republican majority of 
or the Committee and opposed by the Democratic minority. The 

ions . • (^g|-,^^g proceeded. Finally toward the end of October the 
amendments came to a vote and were defeated. Many voted 
against them not on principle, but simply because they were opposed 
to any procedure that might necessitate reopening negotiations with 
Germany. They were willing to vote for the same changes if ex- 
pressed in the form of resolutions. After the defeat of the amend- 
ments the tense and crucial struggle began. Finally after much 
debate the majority of the Senate adopted a series of fifteen reserva- 
The fifteen tions which wcre included in the ratifying resolution. These 
reservations reservations stated the conditions under which the United 
States would accept the Treaty of Versailles, including the Covenant 
of the League of Nations. ' Most of them, indeed, had reference only 
to the Covenant and embodied many of the criticisms leveled against 
that document during the discussion. One of them provided that if 
the United States should desire to withdraw from the League it 
should be the sole judge as to whether it had fulfilled all its obliga- 
tions. Another had reference to the famous Article X and an- 
The change I nounced that " The United States assumes no obligation to 
in Article X preserve the territorial integrity or political independence of 
any country or to interfere in controversies between nations or to 
employ the military and naval forces of the United States under any 
article of the Treaty, unless Congress shall in any case so decide, 
Congress possessing the sole power under the Constitution to declare 
war." In other words not the Council of the League, nor the Pres- 
ident of the United States, but Congress should determine whether 
the army or navy should be used and for what purpose, and Congress 
would have the same right to decline as to accept the recommen- 
dations of the Council. Another reservation asserted that no man- 
date should be accepted by the United States except by action of 
Congress, which meant that the President might not alone commit 
the United States to such an undertaking. Another reservation 
declared that the United States reserved to itself exclusively the 
right to decide what questions are of a domestic nature and 
refuses to submit any such either to arbitration or to the considera- 
tion of the Council or Assembly of the League of Nations. Another 



THE TREATY REJECTED 8ii 

concerned the Monroe Doctrine, declaring that that doctrine is to be 
interpreted by the United States alone and lies wholly outside 
the jurisdiction of the League of Nations. Still another with- Hands off 
held the assent of the United States from those clauses of the Monroe 
the Treaty which concern the transfer to Japan of Ger- °*^ ^"^^ ' 
many's rights in Shantung. The United States was to have full 
liberty of action in any controversy that might arise under those 
clauses between China and Japan. Another reservation provided 
that, if the United States should at any time adopt any plan for the 
limitation of armaments proposed by the Council of the League 
of Nations, it should nevertheless retain the right to increase co'ntToUhe 
such armaments without the consent of the Council whenever size of its 
the United States should be threatened with invasion or be ^ ^ 



engaged m war. 

Such were the more important of the so-called Lodge reservations. 
Embodied in the clause ratifying the Treaty they would require a 
two-thirds vote of the Senate. This they could not secure The Treaty 
unless a considerable number of Republicans and Democrats defeated in 
should combine. But most of the Democrats were opposed to 
them and in favor of ratifying the Treaty without reservations. 
President Wilson denounced the Lodge reservations as amounting to 
a " nullification " of the Treaty and urged the Democratic Senators 
to vote against the ratifying resolution in which they were incorpo- 
rated. Thus it came about that on November 19, 19 19, the Senate 
refused by a vote of 55 to 39 to pass the ratifying resolution, that is, 
refused to ratify the Treaty. As far as the United States was con- 
cerned, the Treaty of Versailles was dead. Whether it could be in 
any way resurrected, whether it could be passed with a different kind 
of ratifying clause, no one could foretell. 

TREATIES WITH AUSTRIA AND BULGARIA 

Meanwhile, before the era of peace could fully dawn upon a weary 
world many other negotiations would have to be brought to a head, 
many other treaties would have to be made and ratified. The Treaty 
with Germany, no doubt the most important of the series, would be 
but one. Nor could it stand alone, as others would be needed prop- 
erly to complete it. This was foreseen in the document itself, which 
repeatedly required German assent to other treaties not yet made. 



8l2 



MAKING. THE PEACE 




M [H 



o 


ri 


H 


I—* 


< 


g" 

3 


W 




M 


3 


H 


W 


H 


O 


I.J 


H 


< 


^ 


W 




PL, 


< 

in 




^ 






o 


<: 




H 


c 


<<C 


;< 


w 


« 


o 



THE AUSTRIAN TREATY 



813 



Vfter German}^ came Austria, and the Conference of Paris submitted 
ts terms to Austria before the Germans had- accepted theirs, on June 
!, 1919. Then followed a period of examination and consul- The treaty 
ation, followed by counter proposals. Finally the amended with Austria 
reaty was submitted to Austria on July 20, and was signed by her 
»n September 10. 

This treaty sealed the doom of the Dual Monarch 3% which had 
)roken up into its component parts. The House of Hapsburg was 
;one and several states had divided its coat of many colors. Hence- 
orth there were to be a Republic of Austria, a Republic of Czecho- 
slovakia, presumably a Republic of Hungary, and parts of the former 




Copyright by Underwood it L'nderuood, 

The Chateau of Saint-Germain 



;mpire were to go to Roumania and Jugo-SIavia. The treaty was 
nade with x'Xustria alone, now sunk to the rank of one of the small 
itates of Europe. 

This document will be known in history as the Treaty of Saint- 
jermain, as it was signed in the former royal castle in that suburb of 
r'aris. In general terms it follows the scheme of the German signed at 
:reaty. The Covenant of the League of Nations comes first, Saint- 
vhich Austria is compelled to accept although, like Germany, 
;he is not to be admitted to the League until the other members 
so decide. The boundaries of Austria are carefully defined and 
ihe recognizes the new states that have arisen out of her collapse. 
Ker disarmament is required in as great detail as that of Germany. 



8i4 MAKING THE PEACE 

Henceforth her army is not to exceed thirty thousand men and the 
size and character of its equipment are strictly hmited. All surplus 
armament must be turned over to the Allies. The manufacture of 
arms is restricted to a single factory controlled by the state. Com- 
pulsory military service is abolished. Austria's navy henceforth 
is to consist of three patrol boats on the Danube. No military or 
naval air forces may be maintained. The amount that Austria 
is to pay for the damage done to the civilian population of her 
enemies and to their property is to be determined by the Repara- 
tion Commission, which shall take into account her resources and 
capacity. She, too, must build " ton for ton and class for class " 
in replacement of all merchant ships and fishing boats lost or 
damaged owing to her activity in the war. She, too, must devote 
her economic resources directly to the physical restoration of in- 
vaded allied territory and she must surrender certain works of art, 
and certain designated pieces of jewelry and of furniture and also 
certain historical records, taken from Italy, in times past, by the 
House of Hapsburg. 

On September 19, 1919, another treaty was started on its way by 

the Conference of Paris, that with Bulgaria, requiring her assent 

to the League of Nations, the reduction of her army to ten 

Draft of the , , '' , ... , . , , , ,• 

treaty with thousand men, the recognition of new frontiers, and the obli- 
Buigana gation to pay over from time to time to the Reparation Com- 

mission at Paris certain sums of money, fixed in the original draft 
at approximately $445,000,000. After several weeks of discussion, 
this treaty was signed toward the close of November, 1919. It will 
be known in history as the Treaty of Neuilly. 

Conditions in Hungary were so unstable and uncertain that no 
negotiations could be satisfactorily undertaken by the Conference. 
Nor could any treaty be made with Turkey until after the Allies 
should agree among themselves as to what should be done with Con- 
stantinople, Anatolia, Armenia, and other parts of the bankrupt and 
moribund empire. Russia, too, remained necessarily outside the 
range of profitable, if possible, negotiation. 

WIDESPREAD DISCONTENT 

Thus as the year 1919 drew to its close the outlines of the new 
Europe were only partially sketched, the stupendous work of settle- 
ment of a distracted globe was only in its initial stages. Whether 



THE PREVALENCE OF UNREST 815 

even that which had been accompUshed would be soon overturned 
by new irruptions of disorder and dissension, no one could predict 
with confidence. The air was filled with the clamor and the widespread 
clangor of discordant voices and strident passions. Every- economic 
where the mind of the nations was unsettled, everywhere there 's""*^'^* 
was deep unrest, everywhere a fermentation of revolutionary doc- 
trine, everywhere disappointed expectations. Explosive materials 
were only too abundant and the danger of new conflagrations only 
too real. The twelve months following the armistice with Germany 
will not rank among the happy years of history, so rancorous and so 
ubiquitous was the spirit of contention that filled it. Labor unrest 
in every country, strikes in every industry, induced by the high cost 
of living, by the sight of conscienceless profiteering, and furthered 
in some cases by political plotters and intriguers of every hue. In 
every country there were those who were eager to overturn existing 
institutions, who fostered and favored subversive doctrines and 
tried to exploit industrial unrest for their own sinister purposes. 
Everywhere there were those who believed in the " socialization " 
of great industries, such as railroads and mines, that is the taking 
over of the industries by the state or by the workers themselves, 
the expulsion, even the expropriation, of those who owned them. 

In another sphere, also, there were manifestations of the spirit 
of disorder which constituted points of danger. The newer states 
were quarreling with each other over boundaries, racial hatreds ^^^^.^^ ^^^ 
and the old, familiar lust of power were showing themselves boundary 
still unvanquished. Decisions of the Conference of Paris were i"^"^®'^ 
in certain quarters being flouted or treated with scant considera- 
tion. How far this defiance would go no one could foresee, nor 
what its consequences might be. 

THE CHALLENGE OF THE FUTURE 

Nevertheless the great results of the war were so obvious and so 
substantial that the public mind could not remain permanently 
depressed. The great and memorable tragedy of our times ^jj^y^st 
could not end in roaring and ignoble melodrama. What had achieve- 
been won by the sacrifice and sorrow of countless millions "^r**^" 
was not likely to be lost by the levity or malevolence of 
blunderers and marplots. The sober sense of mankind would reassert 



8i6 MAKING THE PEACE 

its sway and would insist tliat human destinies should not be made 
the sport of class or faction. Leadership would not pass to the patrons 
of disorder, to the preachers of sedition, to sophisters and quacks and 
missionaries of moonshine. It was quite safe to say that the race 
had distilled enough wisdom from its stern and costly ejcperience to 
be unwilling to jeopardize its future and to imperil civilization by 
following false gods, by embracing the spirit of unreason. 

That future lies no longer in the hands of hereditary rulers or of 
privileged aristocracies. It lies in the hands of the people them- 
The caU to selves. The challenge is to them and to them alone. It is un- 
<J"ty believable that those who have so magnificently responded to 

the demands of duty should now cease to feel its commanding spell. 
" France," said Premier Clemenceau recently to the school children 
of that country, " is calling us in peace as she did in war." And 
President Poincare said on the same occasion and to the same audi- 
ence : " The dead alone have the right to rest ; but we must continue 
their work and realize their wishes. Yesterday France found sol- 
diers. To-day she must find citizens." These utterances of the offi- 
cial leaders of the great country which fought the good fight and 
kept the faith from the beginning to the end of the greatest war of 
history may well be the watchword of the future, and the trumpet 
call to action among every people and in every land. 

THE CONSTITUTION OF GERMANY 

Another document, not the work of the Conference of Paris, but 
which may prove of great importance in the future, is the consti- 
tution of the German Republic. A National Constituent Assembly 
Th G ^^^ elected in Germany on January 19, 19 19, by a popular 

"Reich" vote in which both men and women participated. After 

re *^uWi'^ ^ Several months of deliberation a constitution was adopted on 
July 31 and became effective on August 11. Under this con- 
stitution the former name of the German National State, Deutsches- 
Reich, is preserved, but that state is declared a republic, based upon 
the sovereignty of the people. The national flag is changed from the 
black-white-red tricolor of the Empire to black-red-gold, the colors 
of the historic Holy Roman Empire. It is provided that every state 
of Germany must also have a republican constitution. The old 
states are preserved, so that Germany will constitute a Federal 



THE GERMAN CONSTITUTION 817 

Republic like that of the United States, not a unitary one like that of 
France. It is highly significant that a proposal earnestly urged in 
the Constituent Assembly to split up the large states like Prussia 
into a number of small ones and to unite a number of the petty 
states into larger units so that the average state might number 
about two or three million people and all states might be approxi- 
mately equal, was rejected. The inveterate particularism which 
we encounter all through a thousand years of German history thus 
showed itself still vigorous. And in the new Germany, as in the old, 
Prussia will be larger than all the other states combined, and will 
exercise, consequently, a preponderant and decisive influence. 

The executive head of the state is to be a president chosen by 
the whole German people, women as well as men. This strictly 
universal suffrage, indeed, is to prevail not only in national 
elections, but also in state elections. The president is chosen President of 
/or seven years, but may be reelected, how often the consti- *^^ ^^"^^ 
tution does not say, or may be deposed before the expiration of his 
term, by a referendum. Should the referendum, however, result 
in his favor, it is to count as a new election. The president has 
supreme command over all the military forces of the nation, but he 
is subject to the Reichstag in such matters as a declaration of war 
or a conclusion of peace. He may make alliances and other treaties 
with foreign powers, but certain of these shall require the approval 
of the Reichstag. He has the power to use the armed force of the 
nation to compel the individual states to fulfill their obligations 
under the constitution. Under him are the Chancellor and other 
ministers, who are declared responsible to the Reichstag. Any of the 
ministers may be compelled to resign by an explicit vote of that bod}'. 

The old Bundesrath is succeeded by a Reichsrat, or National 
Council, a body that represents the states. In it every state shall 
have at least one vote. In the case of the larger states one The 
vote will be accorded to every million inhabitants, but no state Reichsrat 
shall have more than two-fifths of all the votes. This, as a matter 
of fact, allows Prussia a larger representation than she enjoyed in the 
old Bundesrath. The new council, like the old, represents, not the 
people of the several states, but their governments, indeed, is to 
consist of members of their respective governments. 

The Reichstag is chosen by universal and secret suffrage, and in 
accordance with the principle of proportional representation. It is 



8i8 MAKING THE PEACE 

elected for four years. It may be dissolved by the President of the 

Republic, but only once for the same cause. The Reichstag is the 

-j-jje lawmaking body. Legislation may be introduced into it by 

Reichstag any member or, under certain conditions, by the President 

or by the Reichsrat, but elaborate provisions are made for a popular 

referendum on laws and also for a popular initiative. The Reichsrat 

has the right to veto laws passed by the Reichstag. If it does so then 

The veto of ^^^^ President may submit the law to a referendum. If he does 

the not exercise this right the law will be considered not to have 

eic srat passed. If, however, the Reichstag by a two-thirds vote rejects 

the veto of the Reichsrat, then the President must either publish the 

law in the form accepted by the Reichstag or decree a referendum. 

The subjects on which the national government may legislate are 

much more numerous than was the case under the former Empire. 

The fundamental rights and duties of German citizens are set forth 

and important sections of the constitution concern the social life, 

the economic life, education and schools, religion and religious 

Economic Societies. Private economic enterprises, for instance, may be 

clauses " socialized," that is, transferred to public ownership, with 

compensation to the former owners. " All mineral treasures and all 

economically useful forces of nature are under the control of the 

nation," that is private rights in mines, water privileges, and so on 

are to be turned over to the nation through legislation. Workmen's 

and Economic Councils are recognized and are to be built up and 

their rights and duties defined. In this section of the constitution 

we plainly see the influence of Russian sovietism. 

The constitution of the German Empire of April i6, 1871, is 
formally annulled. 

Such are some of the features of this document. It was not sub- 
mitted to the people for ratification, but was declared in force on 
the day of its publication. 

This constitution really carries the unification of Germany con- 
siderably farther than Bismarck was able to carry it. The national 
Greater government becomes more important, that of the individual 

centraiiza- states Icss important. Indeed, it is significant that the ex- 
pression "state" is entirely eliminated from the constitution 
and that the former German states are now called " territories " 
or " lands " (Lander). Under the former constitution Bavaria and 
Wiirtemberg ,and Saxony possessed certain independent powers in 



THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT 8iq 

regard to militarj^ organization. These powers they now lose, the 
central government being given supreme control of all the German 
forces. Greater centralization than before will occur in the spheres 
Df railroad ownership and control, and of financial administration 
and taxation, and there will be a complete unification of the postal 
systems. Bavaria will lose her separate postage stamps. The 
stamp collector may consider that part of his task finished as the 
last Bavarian stamp has been issued. 

Other clauses in this constitution which merit particular scrutiny 
are those which concern the presidency. JMay not this office serve as 
a loophole for the establishment of a dictatorship or the restora- 

Can the 

tion of the monarchy ? May it not be considered significant that president 
a proposition to exclude all members of the former ruling fam- become 
ilies of Germany from the presidenc}' was voted down by 198 
votes to 141 ? It is further provided that the president may, in the 
case of civil disorder, act at once upon his own initiative and without 
the countersignature of the Chancellor or the Minister of War, may 
summon " the help of the armed forces," and may, at the same t'.me, 
suspend a number of the articles of the constitution which guarantee 
the liberties of the citizen and freedom of speech, writing, and public 
meeting. While he must " without delay " inform the Reichstag 
of these exceptional measures and while the Reichstag may demand 
that the}' be abandoned, nevertheless it seems more than likely that 
a resolute, reactionary president, bent upon restoring monarchy and 
supported by the army, could easily go as far as did Louis Napoleon 
in France in 185 1. * 

The student should note the further fact that while a president of 
the republic succeeds the former emperor, no local presidents have 
been set up in the place of the deposed kings and dukes and princes 
of the former twenty-two sovereign states. The executive power of 
the various " lands " is vested in ministers. Thus the king of Prussia 
is not succeeded by a president of Prussia, but by a ministry selected 
by the president of the Prussian Chamber acting in agreement with 
the leaders of those political parties which for the time being form the 
majority of the Chamber. 

THE PROBLEM OF GERMANY 

But whether the German Republic endures or whether the Empire 
is restored, whether Germany has undergone or is undergoing a real 



820 MAKING THE PEACE 

inner change of mind and soul, or whether she remains essentially 

the same in feeling and in aspiration, the one most conspicuous and 

German outstanding feature of the new map of Europe is this, that Ger- 

gains from many, whatever may be the amputations made in her territory, 

in Alsace-Lorraine, in Schleswig and the Polish provinces, 

will continue a most formidable fact in the life of the world. With 

sixty or sixty-five million inhabitants, she will have as neighbors on 

the east and south numerous small states, several of them new and 

of uncertain powers of endurance. Formerly she had two great 

states as neighbors — Russia and Austria-Hungary. Both of these 

have been broken into fragments. Germany has not been and has 

become more centralized than ever. Her potential role in Eastern 

and Central Europe has been improved as a result of the war. 

Not that Germany is likely at once to renew her Pangermanic 
exploits in the same old way. She will for some time have her 
pressing preoccupations growing out of her defeat and of the terms 
of peace. But in time the national activity will become normal 
again and she will see, as her leaders already see, that the field for her 
expansive energies presents fewer obstacles than ever before. 
Whether the Germany of the future be a socialistic or a bourgeois 
republic, or a restored monarchy, will make no difference with this 
situation. Here we have a great blunt fact staring at us from the 
new map of Europe, whose significance we shall do well not to ignore 
or minimize. 

The future of the world will be enormously influenced by the 
future of German}'. It will not do to assume that the German mind 
has changed simply because the emperor is a fugitive and a 
Germany president rulcs in his stead. A far profounder transformation 
changed ? than that represented by a mere change in the constitution will 
be needed to convince the world that the peace is more than an 
intermission, a temporary respite from danger. Even should there 
emerge from the crucible of the times a real German democracy, that 
democracy will be but the expression of the German psychology. 
German psychology caused the war and kept it going. The governing 
classes would never have risked the war, had they not known the tem- 
per and the nature of the German people. Nothing has yet occurred 
to show that the great masses of the people d'fifered in 1914 from their 
rulers, either in their conceptions of the nature and duty of the state, 
in their crass economic materialism, in their moral indifferentism, 



GERMANY IN THE FUTURE 821 

or in their arrogance and egotism. The defeat which Germany has 
sustained may abate somewhat her contempt of other nations. It 
is not hkely to diminish her hatred of them. It is far more Ukely 
greatly to intensify that hatred. It is reasonable to believe that a 
nation fed on her own egregious conceit for fifty years, blocked in her 
purposes after four years of various victories, will, at the opportune 
moment, seek to pay off this score, to avenge this humiliation and to 
win once for all the things that she nearly succeeded in winning. 
This is the natural thing to expect and this is what will be expected 
until it is quite evident' that the German mind and character have 
experienced a true transformation. The world still waits the dawn 
of an essentially new Germany. And when it sees it, it will wait 
still longer, since frequently the full day does not bear out the 
promise of the dawn. 

The conclusion of the whole matter is this. For two generations, 
ever since the accession of Bismarck to power, the attention of 
Europe has been riveted upon Germany as the chief source Germany 
of danger to its peace. This attention will continue to be so the center . 
riveted for another generation, perforce, and perhaps for more ° ^^^^ ' 
than one, since the danger inheres in the very situation, in the fun- 
damental and continuing factors of the international life of Europe, 
of the map, and all that it imports. An American economist has 
recently pointed out the reasons that render another war possible 
and even probable. A few of these reasons are as follows: "(i) 
A warlike nation under the sting of defeat will be eager to re- Another 
cover its territory and its power. (2) If it has undertaken to war possible 
pay a crushing indemnity it will be eager to throw off that burden 
and place it on its enemies. Dollars counted in billions it is better 
to receive than to give. (3) It can hope to accomplish this if it can 
build up a fighting league of nations. (4) When a strong combina- 
tion of this kind has been formed success in a war will depend on 
quick action." If Germany is ever able to make such a war upon 
her conquerors, make it she will, unless her whole attitude and 
character change. 

Since the armistice of 1 9 1 8 a distinguished Bavarian has written that 
" the terms imposed on Germany make another war certain in the near 
future, and it will be far more terrible than the recent one " ; and Hin- 
denburg has called Germany " a giant who has been thrown down but 
not disabled," a giant who " has only to rise and take his revenge." 



822 MAKING THE PEACE 

It is not panic fear, but the merest common sense for the world 
to face the situation as it is. Facile optimism, flabby sentimen- 
The present talism, Utopian dreams of permanent peace easily secured by 
situation t^lk, constitute a grave disservice to a world which has just 

passed through the hideous ordeal by fire, and which can escape pass- 
ing through it again only by clearly and effectively neutralizing the 
dangers that environ it. And the way to neutralize those dangers is 
by binding the conquerors of Germany together with hoops of steel. 
That done, that unanimity of purpose, that free and ungrudging 
readiness to support each other secured,' and permanent peace 
becomes not only a possibility, but an assurance. In such a union 
there is strength sufficient to the need. A nation dreaming of at- 
tacking so mighty a force would think twice and even thrice before 
launching forth upon the dangerous adventure, before gambling 
with its destinies once more. Eternal vigilance is the price of peace, 
as it is the price of liberty. The surest hope of the future lies in the 
continuance of a close accord between France, England, and America. 



INDEX 



Abd-el-Kader, 503. 
Abdul Hamid II (Turkey), 626-627, 
664, 668. 

Abukir, battle of, 229. 

Abyssinia, Italy and, 511— 512. 

Accident Insurance Laws (German), 
466. 

Acre, 229. 

Active citizens, 144-145. 

Acton, Lord, opinion of Frederick the 
Great, 64. 

Adana, massacres in, 668-669. 

Adowa, battle of, 512. 

Adrianople, Treaty of, 613 ; troops 
from, 668 ; fall of, 673 ; Turkey 
recovers, 677. 

iEgean Islands, Italy and, 513. 

Afghanistan, England and, 566. 

Africa, Germany and, 468—469 ; 
France and, 503—507 ; England and, 
506, 581, 715 ; Italy and, 511 ; 
Partition of, jjff^ 583-591 ; British 
South, 575-581 ; Spanish posses- 
sions in, 607 ; Portugal and, 608, 
715 ; the Triple Entente and, 686 ; 
and the World War, 696 ; conquest 
of German colonies in, 706. Sea 
also South Africa. 

Agadir, 507. 

Aiguillon, Duke d', 132. 

Aisne, Battle of the, 735 ; Germans 
retreat to the, 747. 

Aix-la-Chapelle, Treaty of, 31. 

Alabama award, 535. 

Albania, 593, 610 ; the Young Turks 
and, 669-670 ; the Great I^owers 
and, 673, 677, 680 ; remnant of 
Serbian army reaches, 704, 707. 

Albert, Germans take, 742. 

Albert of Saxe-Coburg, marries Queen 
Victoria, 356. 

Alberta, 569. 

Aleppo, 753. 



Alexander I (Russia), and Napoleon, 
269, 271, 281, 292 ; enters Paris, 
299 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 
308, 310-312 ; and the Holy Al- 
liance, 314-315 ; and Poland, 379- 
381, 629-630 ; reign of, 628-630. 

Alexander I (Serbia), 624. 

Alexander II (Russia) , and Bismarck, 
470 ; reign of, 631-637. 

Alexander III (Russia), 637-639. 

Alexander of Battenberg, 620-621. 

Alexandria, 228. 

Alfieri, on Italian nationality, 57. 

Alfonso XII (Spain), 605-606. 

Alfonso XIII (Spain), 606-607. 

Algeciras, Conference of, 507. 

Algeria, France and, 503-505, 584; 
Turkey and, 583. 

Algiers, bombarded, 503. 

Allenby, General, and Jerusalem, 
737 ; and Palestine, 752-753- 

Alliance. Sec Holy, Quadruple, Dual, 
Triple. 

Alma, battle of the, 614. 

Alsace, Louis XIV and, 34 ; the prob- 
lem of, 160, 167 ; Germans invade, 
453 ; France cedes, 455-456, 469, 
483 ; hatred of Germany in, 763. 

Alsace-Lorraine, Imperial Territory, 
45^^) 5Q9 ; evacuation of, 761—762 ; 
reverls to France, 796. 

Amadeo (of Savoy), King of Spain, 
605. 

America, Huguenots flee to, 36 ; 
Seven Years' War in, 52-53, 66 ; 
revolt of the English colonies in, 
55-56, 113 ; as model for France, 
141-142 ; Spanish colonies in, re- 
volt, 324, 329—330, 607 ; Central, 
and South, and the World War, 727. 

Amiens, Peace of, 240, 250, 256-257 ; 
German objective, 742. 

Amsterdam, attacked, 31-32. 



323 



824 



INDEX 



Andorra, 593. 

Anglican Church, favored, 343-344 ; 
in Ireland, 529-532 ; and the Edu- 
cation Act of 1902, 550 ; in Wales 
disestablished, 561. 

Anglo-Japanese Treaty (1902), 650, 
697. 

Anglo-Portuguese Alliance, 715. 

Annam, 504-505. 

Anti-Corn Law League, 359. 

Antwerp, 256 ; Germans seize, 693. 

Arabi Pasha, 589. 

Arabia, Turkey and, 696 ; the British 
and, 753. 

Arbitration, Gladstone and, 535 ; 
Permanent Court of, 662 ; United 
States and, 775. 

Archangel, 72. 

Areola, 217. 

Argentina, 513. 

Arkwright, Richard, ^^^. 

Armenia, Turkey and, 696 ; problem 
of, 770. 

Armistice, 761-764. 

Arras, 733; Battle of; 735. 

Artois, Count of, and the Revolution, 
135) 15I) 158; plots against Bona- 
parte, 249 ; leader of the Ultras, 
368-369. Sec also Charles X. 

Ashley, Lord, and the Factory Act of 

1833, 354- 

Asia, Seven Years' War in, 52, 66; 
Russia and, 70, 642 ; France and, 
505, 642; British Empire in, 581, 
642; Portugal and, 608; the Triple 
Entente and, 686 ; and the World 
War, 696, 704, 736-737. 

Asiago Plateau, 735. 

Asia Minor, massacres in, 668 ; Tur- 
key and, 696. 

Aspern, battle of, 283. 

Asquith, Herbert, premier, 551; and 
property, 552; and the House of 
Lords, 555-559; and Home Rule, 
559-561 ; states England's war 
aims, 690-691, 761. 

Assembly. See National, Constit- 
uent, and Legislative. 

Assi gnats, 149. 

Associations of Worship (France), 
501-502. 

Athens, captured, 612; capital of 
Greece, 624. 

Auckland, 573. 



Auerstadt, battle of, 268. 

Augereau, 213-214, 243. 

Augsburg, League of, 47. 

August 4, 1789, 132, 135, 160. 

August 10, 1792, 169-171, 192, 211. 

Aulard, on the Convention, 175; on 
Robespierre, 197. 

Ausgleich, or Compromise of 1867, 
518-519, 521, 525. 

Austerlitz, battle of, 259 ; results of, 
263-264, 283. 

Australia, England and, 563, 569-573 ; 
Constitution Act of the Common- 
wealth of, 573 ; and the World War, 
582, 698, 703 ; and the Peace Con- 
ference, 776. 

Australian ballot, in England, 535. 

Austria, and the Thirty Years' War, 
27; gains of, 47; in the eighteenth 
century, 49, 59-60, 62 ; and the 
Seven Years' War, 66-67 ; and the 
partition of Poland, 68, 82, 378; 
and the emigres, 158; France and, 
166, 205, 208-209, 231 ; and the 
campaigns in Italy, 213-225, 239- 
240; Bonaparte and, 239—240, 293, 
296 ; sues for peace, 240 ; joins the 
third coalition, 258-260; signs 
Treaty of Pressburg, 259—260, 273; 
and the Continental System, 275; 
at war with France, 282-284, 288; 
joins alliance against Napoleon, 
297; and the Congress of Vienna, 
308-314, 325-326; and the Holy 
and Quadruple Alliances, 315-316; 
reaction in, after 1815, 317-320; 
and the German Confederation, 
320—324. 401—402 ; dominant in 
Italy, 325-327; and the Congresses, 
328-330; and the revolutions of 
1830, 375 ; and Belgium, 377 ; and 
the revolutions of 1848, 392-401 ; 
and German unity, 40^1-405 ; and the 
making of the kingdom of Italy, 
422-434; reaction in, 435; Bis- 
marck and, 438 ; Prussia's war with, 
439, 441-444, 518; and Denmark, 
446, 598-599; expelled from Ger- 
man)' and from Italy, 457 ; and the 
Balkans; 470, 526, 610, 617; and 
the Triple Alliance, 470-471, 511, 
685 ; becomes a constitutional mon- 
archy, 515-516 ; and Hungary, 517- 
519; Empire of, after 1867, 520- 



INDEX 



825 



522; and the Congress of Berlin, 
619; and Albania, 674; and Serbia, 
679-685, 695 ; and Italy, 705-706, 
711-712, 735-736, 754; and Russia, 
739-741 ; granted an armistice, 755 ; 
not to be annexed to Germany, 800 ; 
signs treaty of Saint-Germain, 811- 
814 ; a republic, 813. 

Austria-Hungary, Italy declares war 
against, 514; since 1848, 515-526; 
and Bosnia and Herzegovina, 666, 
670, 680; and Serbia, 680-685, 695 ; 
and Roumania, 712; United States 
declares war against, 725 ; and Rus- 
sia, 739-741 ; disruption of, 755- 
756; Germany to evacuate, 762. 

Austrian Netherlands (see also 
Spanish Netherlands), 47; France 
in possession of, 205, 208; annexed 
to Holland, 310, 376. 

Austrian Succession, War of the, 65, 
80. 

Austro-German Treaty (1879), 470- 

471- 
Austro-Prussian War (1866), 441-444, 

594, 598-599- 
Azores, Portugal and, 608. 

Baden, 59 ; Napoleon and, 260 ; up- 
rising in, 404; aids Austria against 
Prussia, 441 ; joins Prussia against 
France, 453 ; Prince Maximilian of, 

473- 
Bagdad, Berlin and, 737, 753; British 

enter, 737. 
Bailly, 127, 192. 
Baker, Sir Samuel, 584. 
Balaklava, 614. 
"Balance of power," 314, 594. 
Balfour, Arthur James, leader of the 

House of Commons, 548 ; and 

Queen Victoria, 550; and the Peace 

Conference, 778. 
Balkan States, Rise of the, 610-627 

wars of 1912 and 1913 in, 660-677; 

and the World War, 679-759. 
Baltic Provinces, acquired by Russia, 

72, 628; Germans control, 732. 
Baluchistan, 565. 
Bank of France, founded, 248. 
Bapaume, 711, 742. 
Barbary States, 503-504. 
Barnav'e, 192. 
Barras, 204. 



Basel, Treaty of, 266. 

Bashi-Bazouks, 616. 

Bastille, 105; fall of, 130, 140, 151, 
158, 491. 

Batak, 617. 

Batavian Republic. See Holland. 

Battenberg, Princess Ena of, 607 ; 
Alexander of, and Bulgaria, 620. 

Batum, 740. 

Baudin, 449. 

Bautzen, battle of, 297. 

Bavaria, 59 ; AustMa sends army into, 
258 ; Napoleon and, 260 ; becomes 
a kingdom, 264 ; Napoleon defeats 
Austria in, 283 ; and the Congress 
of Vienna, 308 ; aids Austria against 
Prussia, 441 ; joins Prussia against 
France, 453 ; in the Bundesrath, 
459 ; revolution in, 757 ; Kurt 
Eisner and, 765. 

Baylen, capitulation of, 280. 

Bayonne, 278. 

Bazaine, 453. 

Beaconsfield, Lord. See Disraeli. 

Beatty, Admiral, 726, 764. 

Beauharnais, Eugene, 293. 

Beauharnais, Josephine. See Jose- 
phine, Empress. 

Beaulieu, 215. 
■ Bebel, Socialist leader, 464. 

Beirut, 753. 
• Belfort, 707. 

Belgium. [Sec also Spanish Nether- 
lands.) Emigres in, 151 ; France 
and, 168, 208, 221, 223, 247, 256, 
258 ; and Waterloo, 303 ; annexed 
to Holland, 310 ; and the July Rev- 
olution, 375-378 ; declares its inde- 
pendence, 377, 594 ; and Congo 
Free State, 586-588 ; a neutralized 
state, 593-595, 687 ; coveted by the 
Pan-Germans, 595 ; and China, 644 ; 
Germany's ultimatum to, 687-689 ; 
and the World War, 691-707, 748, 
751 ; Evacuation of, 761 ; and the 
Peace Conference, 776^778. 

Belgrade, capital of Serbia, 611 ; 
seized, 704. 

Belleau Wood, 744. 

Beresina, crossing of the, 295. 

Berg, Duke of, 261. See Murat. 

Berlin, Huguenots flee to, 37 ; war 
party in, 266 ; Decrees, 268, 274 ; 
University of, 288, 480 ; Poles in, 



826 



INDEX 



381 ; uprising in, 395 ; becomes 
center of interest, 445 ; capital of 
the German Empire, 457 ; Congress 
of, 470, 526, 619-620, 623, 625 ; and 
the Reichstag, 474-475, 4.78 ; Con- 
ference, 586 ; and Bagdad, 737, 
753 ; revolution in, 757 ; socialists 
in, 765-767- 

Bernadotte, Crown Prince, 600. 

Bernhardi's "World-Empire or Down- 
fall," 761. 

Bernstorff, von, dismissed, 725. 

Berry, Duke of, murdered, 368. 

Berthier, 227, 230. 

Bessarabia, Russia and, 311. 

Bethmann-Hollweg (Chancellor), 

471 ; and the violation of Belgian 
neutrality, 688-689 ; and the sub- 
marine campaign, 723. 

Bill of Rights, 8, 26. 

Birmingham, unrepresented, 343. 

Bismarck, Otto von, and the unifi- 
cation of Germany, 437—444 ; de- 
sires war with France, 451-457 ; 
Chancellor, 460-461 ; and the May 
Laws, 462-463 ; and Socialism, 
464-467 ; and the policy of protec- 
tion, 467-468 ; and the German 
colonies, 468-469 ; and the Triple 
Alliance, 469-471 ; resignation of,* 
472-473 ; on the Prussian electoral 
system, 477 ; and Schleswig, 599 ;' 
and the Congress of Berlin, 619 ; 
and William II, 761. 

Black Sea, neutralized, 615. 

Blanc, Louis, program of, 338 ; and 
the Provisional Government, 390, 
407-410. 

Blenheim, 47. 

Bliss, General Tasker, 778. 

"Bloody Sunday" (Russia), 656. 

"Bloody Week," 487. 

Blucher, 303-305. 

Boer War, 549, 552, 579-580. 

Boers, and English in South Africa, 
575-580, 584. 

Bohemia, in Austria, 319, 519; revo- 
lution in, 395-396; conquered, 396; 
invaded, 442-443; claims of, 520; 
races of, 521 ; concessions to, 521. 

Boileau, 46. 

Bolivia, 776. 

Bolsheviki, in Russia, 729-732; and 
peace, 739-741. 



Bombay, England acquires, 563. 

Bonaparte, Caroline, 261. 

Bonaparte, Charles, 209. 

Bonaparte, Elsie, 261. 

Bonaparte, Jerome, 209, 262, 270; 
King of Westphalia, 286 ; flees from 
Westphalia, 297. 

Bonaparte, Joseph, and Naples, 260, 
276; becomes King of Spain, 278, 
280, 286, 324. 

Bonaparte, Louis, becomes King of 
Holland, 260-261 ; forced to abdi- 
cate, 275, 286; his son, 412. 

Bonaparte, Lucien, 232, 234-235, 261. 

Bonaparte, Napoleon. See Napoleon. 

Bonaparte, Pauline, 261. 

Bonapartists, 384, 487. 

Bordeaux, "conversion" in, 35; Par- 
lement of, 107 ; civil war in, 182 ; 
Duke of, 374, 384; government at, 
454, 483, 692. 

Borghese, Prince, 261. 

Boris, King of Bulgaria, 754. 

Borneo, 696. 

Borodino, battle of, 294. 

Borough, representation in Great 
Britain, 342-343, 352. 

Bosnia, Austria "occupies," 470, 619; 
Austria annexes, 526, 666, 670, 680, 
683; Turkey and, 610; and Herze- 
govina, 616. 

Bosporus, 755, 770. 

Bossuet, 36, 46. 

Botany Bay, 570. 

Botha, Louis, 580. 

Boulanger, General, 494. 

Boule (Greece), 625. 

Boulogne, camp at, 257, 258; Louis 
Napoleon at, 412. 

Bourbon (Island), now Reunion, 503. 

Bourbon monarchy, in France, 113, 
121, 276; banner of the, 130; res- 
toration of, demanded, 202 ; House 
of, ceases to rule in Naples, 260, 
276; House of, in Spain, 276-278; 
House of, restored in France, 300, 
366; elder branch, overthrown in 
France, 376; attempted fusion of 
the two branches of, 487-488 ; reign 
of Spanish, ended, 604. 

Bouresches, 744. 

Bourgeoisie, in France, under the Old 
Regime, loo-ioi; Louis Philippe 
and, 383-387. 



INDEX 



Bourrienne, 226, 234. 

"Boxer" movement, 649. 

Braga, Dr. Theophile, President of 
Portugal, 608. 

Braganza, House of. See Portugal. 

Brandenburg, Huguenots flee to, 36. 
See also Prussia. 

Bratiano, 778. 

Brazil, Portugal and, 276, 608; and 
the World War, 727; and the Peace 
Conference, 776. 

Bremen, 275, 286; a republic, 460; 
establishes trading stations, 468; 
revolution in, 757. 

Brest-Litovsk, Treaty of, 702, 732, 
739'~74i ; Germany renounces, 762. 

Breze, de, 127. 

Brienne, 209. 

Bright, John, and the Anti-Corn Law 
League, 359 ; and the Reform Bill 
of 1867, 362. 

British Empire, 563-582. See also 
England. 

British Xorth America x\ct, 567. 

Broglie, Duke of, 490-491. 

Brougham, Lord, and the Reform Bill 
of 1832, 347, 351. 

Brumaire, 193; the i8th and 19th of, 
232-235, 262, 413. _ 

Brunswick, Duke of, issues manifesto, 
169, 171; approach of, 172, rev'o- 
lution in, 381, 757. 

Brusilofi', General, 712-713, 727. 

Brussels, 303; street fighting in, 377; 
occupied, 691. 

Bryce's American Commonwealth, cen- 
sored in Russia, 640. 

Bucharest, Treaty of, 675-677, 679, 
703, 754; entered, 713; Germany 
renounces Treaty of, 762. 

Budget, in England, 78; in Prussia, 
439; of 1909 (England), 553-SS6. 

Bukowina, 712. 

Bulgaria, Turkey and, 610, 616; and 
Herzegovina, 6i6 ; and the Treaty 
of San Stefano, 617; and the Con- 
gress of Berlin, 619-620; after 1878, 
620-622; and Servia, 623; declares 
its independence, 666, 670; Mace- 
donian Christians and, 669 ; and 
the Balkan Wars of 191 2 and 
1913, 671-677; joins the Central 
Powers, 703-704; surrenders, 753- 
754; treaty of Neuilly, 814. 



Billow, von (Chancellor), 473; and 
Prussia, 475 ; and Liberalism, 480- 
481 ; and the collapse of Turkey, 
679. 

Bundesrath (Federal Council), created, 
444; its powers, 458-460, 479. 

Burke, Edmund, and the American 
Revolution, 55 ; and the French 
Revolution, 339 ; and the House of 
Commons, 349 ; and the partition 
of Poland, 378. 

Burma, England and, 565, 642. 

Buzot, 156. 

Byng, 751. 

Byron, Lord, and Greece, 613. 

Cabinet government in England, 51- 

"Cadets," 657. 

Cadoudal, Georges, 249-250. 

Cahiers, 123, 143. 

Cairo, 228, 229. 

Calendar, Julian, in Russia, 74; re- 
publican, in France, 193 ; European, 
adopted in Japan, 647. 

Calonne, 120. 

Cambaceres, 238. 

Cambodia, Kingdom of, 504. 

Cambrai, Battle of, 735 ; fall of, 751. 

Cambridge, University, Cromwell and, 
13; Dissenters and, 343-344; voters 
in, 354; religious tests abolished in, 

533- 
Campbell-Banncrman, Sir Henry, 

premier. 551. 
Campo Formio, Peace of, 219, 221, 

225, 240, 256, 260, 262. 
Canada, acquired by England, 50, 53, 

566 ; Dominion of, 567-569 ; and the 

World War, 582, 698-699, 735; and 

the Peace Conference, 776. 
Canadian Pacific Railway, 569. 
Canning, and the Holy Alliance, 346; 

and the House of Commons, 349. 
Cantigny, 744. 
Canton, 643. 

Cape Colony. 311, 575, 583. 
Cape of Good Hope, 564. 
Cape Town, 581. 
Caprera, 431, 433. 
Caprivi f Chancellor), 473. 
Carbonari, in Italy, 327, 427; in 

France, 372 ; Mazzini and, 419-420. 
Carinthia, 284. 



828 



INDEX 



Carlists (Spain), 605-606. 

Carlos I (Portugal), 608. 

Carlotta, Empress of Mexico, 448. 

Carlsbad Decrees, 323, 382. 

Carlstad, Conference of, 603. 

Carlj-le, on the 13th of Vendemiaire, 
205 ; and Queen Victoria, 355 ; and 
the Reform Bill of 1867, 364. 

"Carmen Sylva," 616. 

Carniola, 284, 521. 

Carnot, Lazare, 188. 

Carnot, Sadi, 494-495. 

Caroline Islands, 469. 

Carrier, 189, 193. 

Carso Plateau, 735. 

Cartwright, Dr. Edmund, ^,^3. 

Casimir-Perier. See Perier, Casimir. 

Cassel, Prussians in^ade, 442. 

Castelar, 606. 

Castelfidardo, 433. 

Castel Gandolfo, 509. 

Catherine II (Russia), 76-77, 79, 82. 

Catholic Church (Greek), 69, 614; in 
Russia, 628; in Turkey, 669. 

Catholic Church (Roman), clergy of, 
under the Old Regime, 95-97 ; Vol- 
taire and, 103, 109 ; clergy of, in the 
States-General, 122—126; Constit- 
uent Assembly and, 147-149 ; Civil 
Constitution of the Clergy, 149- 
151 ; the (French) Bourbons and, 
244-245, 300; Bonaparte and, 245- 
247, 290, 300, 500 ; position of, in 
Germany, altered, 263 ; clergy of, in 
Spain, 279; and the Bourbon Res- 
toration, 367, 371; in Poland, 379, 
628; and the Kulturkampf, 462- 
463 ; and the Third Republic, 490— 
491 ; Separation of, and state, in 
France, 499— 502 ; and state, in Italy, 
509 ; Canada and, 566 ; in Spain, 
607 ; separated from the State (Port- 
ugal), 608. 

Catholic Emancipation Act, 347, 531. 

Catholics, in the English Civil War, 
12, 15; and the Restoration, 25; 
under the Old Regime, 103; in 
England (1815), 343; in Ireland, 
529-532. 

Cavaignac, and Louis. Philippe, 375; 
and the June Days, 410-41 1 ; candi- 
date for the presidency, 413. 

Cavite, 607. 

Cavour, Count Camillo di, 423, 614; 



and the making of the Kingdom of 
Italy, 424-428, 432 ; and Rome, 
434; death of, 434; and Bismarck, 
437 ; and a free Church, 509. 

Center, party in Germany, 462-463. 

Cejdon, England and, 240, 311, 564. 

Chamber of Deputies (France), es- 
tablished, 366, 368 ; dissolved by 
Charles X, 371 ; and Louis Philippe, 
383, 388-389; established 1875, 
489-490; Algeria and, 505; in Tur- 
key, 668. 

Chamber of Peers (France), estab- 
lished, 366. 

Chamberlain, Joseph, Colonial Secre- 
tary, 548; and tariff reform, 551; 
and the South African War, 579. 

"Chambers of Reunion," 34. 

Chambord, Count of, 487-488. 

Chancellor, powers of, in German}-, 
458, 460. 

Charles I (Austria), 526. 

Charles I (England), and Parliament, 
5-1 1 ; and the Civil War, 11-16; 
trial and execution of, 16. 

Charles I (Roumania), 615—616, 623. 

Charles II (England), Irish support, 
18; and Scotland, 19; flees, 19; 
King of England, 25. 

Charles IV (Spain), 276-278. 

Charles X (France), reign of, 369- 
374; flees to England, 374; the 
Legitimists and, 384. 

Charles, Archduke of Austria, 218, 
283-284. 

Charles Albert (Piedmont), defeated, 
396-397, 400; abdicates, 400; and 
the Constitutional Statute, 405, 423. 

Charles Felix (Piedmont), 328. 

Chartist agitation, 356-358. 

Chateau-Thierry, 743-744, 747. 

Chateaux, war upon the, 132. 

Chatham, Earl of. See Pitt. 

Chaumette, 192-193. 

Chemin des Dames, "jT/S- 

Chemnitz, 757. 

Child labor, England and, 353-354; 
legislation, 360-362. 

Chili, naval battle off the coast of, 
698, 716. 

China, and Russia, 642 ; early history 
of, 643 ; the Opium War, 643-644 ; 
and the treaty ports, 644 ; and Japan, 
647-650, 652-653; a republic, 653- 



INDEX 



829 



654; and the Hague Conference. 

661; and the World War, 727; 

future of, 770; and the Peace Con- 
ference, 776. 
Chino- Japanese War, 647-650. 
Christian (King of XorwajO, 600. 
Church of England. Sec Anglican 

Church. 
Cintra, 280. 
Cisalpine Republic, 221; becomes 

Kingdom of Italy (1805), 253. See 

Italy. 
Civil Service, Reform (England), 535 ; 

of India, 565 ; in China, 653. 
Clarendon, concerning Cromwell, 24. 
Clemenceau, 778. 
Clement XIV (Pope), 68. 
Clericalism, Gambetta and, 490; 

Combes and, 500. 
Clermont, sails from New York to 

Albany, 335. 
Cobbett, \\'illiam, and The Weekly 

Political Register, 345. 
Cobden, Richard, and the Anti-Corn 

Law League, 359. 
Coblenz, emigres in, 164; the Allies 

hold, 762 ; Americans occupy, 763. 
Cochin-China, 504. 
Colbert, minister of Louis XI\', 42- 

47- 
Colmar, 763. 
Cologne, electoral system in, 477; 

revolution in, 758 ; the Allies hold, 

762 ; English occupy, 763. 
Cologne Gau'tle, 763. 
"Colonial preference," 551. 
Colonial Society (German), 468. 
Colonies, English, 52-53, 31 1-3 12, 

536-537, 563-582, 585, 588-591; 

German, 468-469, 585 ; French, 

492-493, 502-507, 583, 585, 589; 

Italian, 511-513; Belgian, 586-588, 

595; Dutch, 595; Spanish, 607; 

Portuguese, 608 ; conquests of the 

German, 706. 
Combes, and clericalism, 500. 
Committee of General Security, 

created, 181, 184; work of, 185, 200. 
Committee of Public Safety, created, 

181, 184; work of, 185-1S6, 189, 192, 

194-195, 200. 
Commons, House of, Charles I and, 

9; during the Commonwealth, 18, 

20-22; restored, 25; in 1815, 340- 



343 ; and the Reform Bill of 1832, 
347-352; the Home Rulers and, 
542 ; and the House of Lords, 554- 
559 ; Irish House of, 559 ; Canadian 
House of, 567. 

Commonwealth, and Cromwell, 18-24. 

Commune (Paris). See Paris. 

"Conclusion" of March, 1803, 263. 

Concordat, 245-247, 300, 500, 502 ; 
abrogated, 501. 

Conde, 30. 

Conde, Prince of. See Enghien, 
Duke d'. 

Condorcet, 192 

Confederation of the Rhine (1806), 
formed, 264; enlarged, 271; Capo- 
leon Protector of, 286, 296 ; deserts 
Napoleon, 297, comes to an end. 
320. 

Conference, of Paris, 776-809. 

Congo Free State, 586-588, 595. 

Congress, of Vienna, 300-301, 308- 
314, 321, 325, 376-377, 379, 429, 
619, 629, 769; of Troppau, 328; of 
Laibach, 328; of Verona, 329; of 
Paris (1856), 416, 426, 615; of 
Berlin, 470, 526, 619-620, 623, 625, 
666. 

Congresses, The, 308—330. 

Constantine, Crown Prince (Greece), 
672 ; King of Greece, 705 ; deposed, 

727, 754- 

Constantinople, seat of Orthodox 
Greek Church, 69 ; bronze horses of, 
223 ; .\lexander I desires, 292 ; Rus- 
sians approach, 613, 617; mutiny 
in, 668 ; capital of Turkey, 696, 702 ; 
problems of, 770. 

Constituent Assembly (France), com- 
position and character, 128; inau- 
gurates a social revolution, 132— 
138; work of, 140—154, 160, 289; 
in Russia, 732 ; in Weimar, 767. 

Constitution, the making of the 
(French), 140-154; Civil, of the 
Clergy, 149-151, 157; of 1791, 142- 
147, 171, 183, 203, 238, 324; of 
1793, 182-184; of 1795, 202-204, 
208; of 1799, 237-239; of 1812 
(Spain), 324, 327-328; of 1850 
(Prussia), 406; of 1848 (France), 
411-412 ; of 187s, 487-490; of Italy, 
508; of Eidsvold (Norway), 600- 
602; of 1876 (Spain), 606; of 1876 



830 



INDEX 



(Turkey), 626; or Fundamental 
Laws (Finland), 640-641; of 1889 
(Japan), 647; of 191 1 (China), 653; 
of Germany, 816-820. 

Constitutional Charter (France), 300, 
366-367, 385, 387. 

Constitutional Democrats (Russia), 
657, 728. 

Constitutional Statute (Piedmont), 

405- 
Consulate, 236-250; and the Empire, 

415- 
Consuls, appointed, 234, 238. See 

also Consulate. 
Continental System, 273-276, 286- 

287; results of, 290-291; Russia 

and, 292. 
Conventicle Act, 25. 
Convention, called in France, 171- 

172; work of, 175—206, 273, 289. 
Cook, Captain, voyages of, 570. 
Corday, Charlotte, and Marat, 192. 
Cordelier Club, 161-163. 
Corfu, island of, 704-705. 
Corn Laws, of 181 5, 344; repeal of, 

358-360, 531. 
Corsica, Bonaparte and, 209—210, 230, 

299. 
Cortes (Spain), 329, 605. 
Corvee, 118. 

Council of Elders, 203-204, 232-234. 
Council of the Empire (Russia), 657- 

658. 
Council of the Five Hundred, 203- 

204,_ 232-234. 
Council of State, during the Common- 
wealth, 18; in France, 238, 247-24S. 
Council of States (Switzerland), 596. 
County, representation in Great 

Britain, 340-342, 352. 
Coup d'etat, of 1799, 231-235; of 

1851, 413-415, 449, 484; in Turkey 

(1908), 627 ; in Russia, 728. 
Courland, Russia acquires, 72, 628; 

overrun, 702 ; and Brest-Litovsk, 

740. 
Court of Cassation, and the Dreyfus 

case, 498. 
Couthon, 201. 

Cracow, becomes a free city, 311. 
Crete, Greece and, 625, 666, 673; the 

Great Powers and, 673. 
Crimea, Russia gains, 77 ; war in, 416, 

426, 613-615, 624. 



Crispi, 51 1-5 1 2. 

Croatia, 284 ; Jellachich and, 398 ; and 
Hungary, 519; Magyars compro- 
mise with, 523. 

Croatians, in Hungary, 397-398, 519, 

523-524- 

Croker, 350. 

Cromer, Lord, 590. 

Cromwell, Oliver, and Charles I, 7 ; 
early life, 12—13 > 2-rid the Civil War, 
13-16; and the Commonwealth, 18- 
24; dissolves the Long Parliament, 
21-22 ; Lord Proctector, 23 ; foreign 
policy of, 23-24 ; death of, 24 ; at- 
titude of the Restoration toward, 
25 ; and Ireland. 530. 

Cromwell, Richard, abdicates, 25. 

Cuba, war in, 606-607 J ^-I'^d the World 
War, 727; and the Peace Confer- 
ence, 776. 

Cunard, Samuel, 335. 

Gushing, Caleb, and China, 644. 

Custozza, battle of, 397, 400, 423, 443. 

Cyprus, England "occupies," 619. 

Czecho-Slovakia, 770, -and the Peace 
Conference, 776, 784, 813. 

Czecho-Slovaks, declare their inde- 
pendence, 755. 

Czechs, in Bohemia, 395-396, 520; 
and the Taaffe ministry, 521. 

Czernin, 739. 

Czernowitz, and the line of battle, 
702 ; captured, 712. 

Dahomey, 504. 

Dalmatia, 221, 260, 755. 

Damascus, 753. 

Danton, a monarchist, 154; leader of 
the Cordelier Club, 163 ; head of the 
executive council, 172; on the im- 
portance of Paris, 176; and the 
Girondists, 176-177, 181, 184; and 
the Revolutionary Tribunal, 185, 
187; and Robespierre, 195; fall of, 
196 ; on education, 206. 

Dantonists, 195. 

Danubian Principalities, 292. 

Danzig, and the treaty of Versailles, 
798-799. 

Dardanelles, attacked, 702-703 ; 
opened to the Allies, 755 ; problem 
of, 770. 

David, 198. 

Davout, 268. 



INDEX 



831 



Deak, Francis, 393-394, Si 6, 524. 

Debene}', 751. 

Dego, 215. 

Delarey, 5S0. 

Delbriick, Professor, on the German 
Parliament, 480-481. 

Delcasse, Theophile, and Italy, 506. 

Delegations (Austria-Hungary), 518. 

Denmark, and the Continental Sys- 
tem, 275; and the Congress of 
Vienna, 308, 312 ; Prussia's war with, 
439-441, 598-599; and Africa, 583; 
cedes Norway to Sweden, 598 ; and 
Schleswig and Holstein, 598-600; 
Prince Charles of, chosen King of 
Norway, 603. 

Departments, of France, 147; martial 
law proclaimed in, 414. 

Depretis, 511. 

Derby, Lord, ministry of, 362-364. 

Desaix, 227, 240. 

Deshima, peninsula of, 645. 

Desmoulins, Camille, 195. 

Devil's Island, Dreyfus and, 496-497. 

Dey of Algeria, 503. 

Diderot, 76, 106. 

Diet, German (Imperial), 59, 160, 
319; at Frankfort, 320-321; Bohe- 
mian, 521 ; Swedish, 601. 

Directory, composition of, 203 ; work 
of, 205, 208-235, 273. 

Disraeli, Benjamin, and the Reform 
Bill of 1867, 362-364; ministry, 
536—538; and the Transvaal, 575- 
576; and the Congress of Berlin, 
619. 

Dissenters, in Great Britain, 343- 
344, 346 ; and the Education Act of 
1902, 550. 

Divine Right, defined 4; overthrown 
in England, 26 ; in Europe, 80. 

Dmowski, 778. 

Dodecanese, Italy and, 671. 

Domestic system, of production, 332- 

333^ 337- 
Douaumont, 708. 
Draga, Queen (Serbia), 624. 
Dragonnadcs, 35. 
Dresden, Austrians defeated at, 297 ; 

Saxony .retains, 310-311; Prussians 

invade, 442. 
Dreyfus Case, 495-499. 
Drogheda, stormed, 19. 
Dual x\.lliance, 470, 495, 683, 685. 



Dual Control, 589-590. 
Dual Monarchy. See Austria-Hun- 
gary. 
Dublin, Parliament in, abolished, 530, 

541- 
Ducos, 234. 

Duma (Russia), 657-659, 727-728. 
Dumba, 718. 
Dumouriez, 179. 
Dunbar, battle of, 19, 24. 
Dunkirk, England gains, 24; France 

gains, 32. 
Dupont, General, 280. 
Durham, in the Grey Ministrj', 347 ; 

mission to Canada, 566-567. 

East Africa, Italy and, 511 ; Germany 
and, 762. 

East India Company, 564-565. 

East Indies, Dutch colonies in, 595. 

East Prussia, electoral districts in, 
478 ; Russia invades, 695, 700. 

Eastern Question, Russia and, 77, 610, 
614-615; Austria-Hungary and, 
526, 610; reopened (1876), 538,' 
616—620, 624; and the revolution in 
Turkev, 625, 665 ; and the World 
War, 684. 

Eastern Routnelia, 619; and Bul- 
garia, 621. 

Ebert, German Chancellor, 758, 765- 
767 ; president of the German 
"Reich," 767. 

Ebert-Haase government, 766-767. 

Ecuador, 776. 

Edict of Emancipation, Alexander II 
and, 631-633. 

Education, in Russia, 74 ; the Con- 
vention (France) and, 206 ; national, 
in France reorganized, 248; in Eng- 
land (181 5), 344; national (France), 
492; in Italy, 510; in England 
(1870), 534-535; made free in Eng- 
land, 535, 546; Act of 1902 
(England), 550; Bill of 1906 (Eng- 
land) , defeated by House of Lords, 
553 ; in Switzerland, 597 ; in Portu- 
gal, 608 ; in Bulgaria, 622 ; in Greece, 
625 ; in Japan, 646-647 ; in China, 

653- 
Edward VII (England), accession of, 

550; death of, 556. 
Eg3q)t, Napoleon's expedition to, 225- 

229, 230, 240; England and, 506, 



832 



INDEX 



537, 581, 585, 588-591, 670; Turkey 
and, 583, 696; becomes a protector- 
ate, 697. 

Eidsvold, Constitution of, 600-602. 

Eisner, Kurt, 765. 

Elba, Napoleon and, 299, 310. 

Elders, Council of. Sec Council of 
Elders. 

Electoral system, in France, 144-147 ; 
in Germany, 475-479. 

Elgin, Lord, and Canada, 567. 

Eliot, Sir John, 7-8. 

Elizabeth (Russia), 76. 

Emerson, on Napoleon, 251. 

Emigres, intrigues of, 157-159, 164- 
165, 167, 169, 177; guillotined, 190; 
laws against relaxed, 244; Louis 
XVIII and, 300; Charles X and, 
369- 

Empire, earl}' years of the French, 
251-272; at its height, 273-285. 

Empire, The. See Holy Roman Em- 
pire. 

Ems dispatch, 452. 

Ena, Princess of Battenberg, marries 
Alfonso XIII, 607. 

Enghien, Duke d', and Napoleon, 250, 
278. 

England, in the seventeenth century, 
1-26; Civil War in, 11-16; and the 
Commonwealth, 18-24; a-nd the 
Restoration, 25-26; enters Triple 
Alliance, 31 ; Huguenots flee to, 36 ; 
and Holland, 37 ; and Louis XIV, 
47; in the eighteenth century, 49- 
56; and Frederick the Great, 66; 
government of, 107, in; enters 
war against France, 179, 205, 208, 
231; Napoleon and, 225, 239, 256, 
273-275, 290-291, 297; and the 
Peace of Amiens, 240, 256 ; and the 
third coalition against France, 256- 
258; and the Berlin Decrees, 268; 
Alexander I and, 269 ; and the con- 
tinental blockade, 274-275, 286- 
287, 292 ; joins the Peninsula cam- 
paign, 280-281, 283; and the Con- 
gress of Vienna, 308-314; and the 
Quadruple Alliance, 315-316; and 
the Congresses, 328-330; and the 
Industrial Revolution, 331-338; 
an Era of Reform in, 339-364; 
Parliament of, 340-343 ; and religion, 
343-344 ; people of, neglected, 344- 



345; and the Reform Bill of 1832, 
347-352; a democracy, 364; and 
the July Revolution, 375; and the 
neutrality of Belgium, 377; Louis 
Philippe and, 382, 390; and the 
Crimean War, 416, 426, 614; and 
Villafranca, 429 ; and Mexico, 447 ; 
and the Entente Cordiale, 506 ; 
since 1868, 527-561; and the Boer 
War, 579-580; and Africa, 583, 585 ; 
and Egypt, 585, 588-591, 670; and 
Greece, 612-613, 625; and the 
Treaty of San Stefano, 617-619; 
and the Congress of Berlin, 619 ; in 
Asia, 642 ; and the Opium War, 
643-644 ; and China, 648-649 ; and 
Japan, 650; and the World War, 
682, 684, 689-699, 702-703, 706- 
707, 710-711, 715-717, 732-735, 
737-738, 742-756; and the Triple 
Entente, 686-687 ; and the Peace 
Conference, 776-779. 

Enos, line from, to Midia, 673. 

Entente Allies, 609. 

Entente Cordiale, 506-507. 

Enver Pasha, 696. 

Epinal, 707. 

"Equal Rights of Nationalities" 
(Hungary), 524. 

Equality, the Revolution and, 105, 
134; Bonaparte and, 241; Consti- 
tutional Charter of 1814 and, 366- 

367- 

Erfurt Interview, 281. 

Eritrea, 511. 

Erivan, 740. 

Esperey, Franchet d', 753. 

Essling, battle of, 283. 

Established Church (England), 343. 
See also Anglican Church. 

Esterhazy, Major, 496. 

Esthonia, Russia acquires, 72, 628; 
and Brest-Litovsk, 740. 

Eugene, Prince, of Austria, 47. 

Eugenie, Empress, 416, 453. 

Europe, in the eighteenth century, 
49-83; Seven Years' War, 66-67; 
Campo Formio treaty changes map 
of, 221 ; Russia and, 231 ; at peace, 
241; coast of, blockaded, 257; dip- 
lomatic system of, altered, 269; 
and the Continental System, 273- 
276, 286; new map of, 308-314; 
reaction in, after 1815, 317-327; 



INDEX 



833 



influence of the July Revolution 
upon, 375-382 ; central, in revolt, 
392-406 ; map of, altered by Prussia, 
444; and the year 1866, 445; and 
the treaty of San Stefano, 470; 
German leadership in, 471; ex- 
pansion of, 563 ; small states of, 
593-609; the Turks and, 610; re- 
construction of, 768-770. 

European War (1914), and Imperial 
Federation, 582 ; the Balkan wars 
of 191 2 and 1913 and, 660-677. 
See also World War. 

Eylau, battle of, 269. 

Factory, Sj'stem of production, 337- 

338, 344; Act of 1833, 354, 360; 

laws (England), 361-362; laws 

(New Zealand), 574. 
Faidherbe, 504. 
Falaba, 720. 
Falk Laws, 462—463. 
Falkenhayn, and Roumania, 713. 
Falkland Islands, naval battle off the, 

698, 716. 
Far East, The, 642-654, 697. 
Fashoda, 506. 
Faure, Felix, 495. 
Favre, Jules, and the Third Republic, 

453- 
Federal Act (German Confederation), 

321-322. 
Federal Council (Switzerland), 596. 
Federal Tribunal, Switzerland, 596. 
Federalists, of southern Spain, 606. 
Ferdinand I (Austria), 319; forced to 

abdicate, 398. 
Ferdinand (later Ferdinand VII) of 

Spain, 276-278, 324. 
Ferdinand (Naples) and Austria, 326- 

327- 

Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, and Bul- 
garia, 621-622; becomes Czar of 
Bulgaria, 622, 666; and the World 
War, 703 ; abdicates, 754. 

Ferry, Jules, and the Third Republic, 
453, 491-493 ; and Tunis, 504. 

Feudalism, relics of, 84-87 ; in France, 
95, 102-103, 121; abolished in 
France, 132, 134, 242; abolished in 
Spain, 282; in Austria, 319; abol- 
ished in Hungary, 395 ; in Sweden, 
601. 

Fielden, 354. 



Fife, 341. 

Figueras, 606. 

Finch, Chief- Justice, 9. 

Finland, Russia and, 269, 275, 292, 
311, 628; Nicholas II and, 640-641 ; 
the Provisional Government and, 
728 ; declares its independence, 732 ; 
and the peace, 739-740. 

First Consul. Sec Napoleon. 

Five Hundred, Council of. See Coun- 
cil of the Five Hundred. 

Five Members, 11. 

Five Mile Act, 25. 

Flanders, British ofTensive m, 735 ; 
German attack in, 743. See also 
Spanish Netherlands. 

Florence, republic of, 400-401 ; cap- 
ital of Italy, 508. 

Florida, England acquires, 53. 

Foch, General, and the Battle of the 
Marne, 692 ; Commander in Chief, 
742 ; assumes the ofTensive, 747- 
752; and the armistice, 756; enters 
Strasburg, 763. 

Fontainebleau, 299. 

Formosa, Island of, 647, 652. 

Forster Education Act (1870), 534- 

535- 550- . 

Fouquier-Tinville, 200. 

Fox, and the American Revolution, 
55 ; and the House of Commons, 
349 ; colonial policy of, 567. 

France, favored by Cromwell, 24; 
under Louis XIV, 27-48; in the 
Eighteenth century, 49 ; and the 
Seven Years' War, 52-53, 66-67, 
564; and the American Revolution, 
55-56, 113 ; Old Regime in, 84-112 ; 
beginnings of the Revolution in, 
1 13-138; and the making of the 
Constitution, 140-154; and the 
Legislative Assembly, 156-174; de- 
clares war on Austria, 166 ; becomes 
a democracy, 171; and the Con- 
vention, 175-206; proclaimed a re- 
public, 175; under the Directory, 
208-235 ; and Corsica, 209 ; threat- 
ened with invasion, 230; under the 
Consulate, 236-250; Bank of, 
founded, 248 ; earl}' years of the 
Empire, 251-272; third coalition 
against, 256-258; and the Treaty 
of Pressburg, 259—260; and the 
transformation of Germany, 262- 



«34 



INDEX 



266; conquers Prussia, 26(^-268; 
the Empire at its height, 273-285; 
annexes Holland and northern 
coasts of Germany, 275; and the 
Papal States, 275-276, 286, 290; 
at war with Austria, 282-285 ; and 
the decline and fall of Napoleon, 
286-306 ; and the alliance with 
Russia, 291—293; invaded 297, 299; 
reign of Louis XVIII in, 299-301 ; 
Napoleon returns from Elba to, 301— 
303 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 
308-314; and the Congresses, 328- 
330; industrial revolution in, 336; 
Reaction and Revolution in, 366- 
390; and Belgian neutrality, 377; 
Second Republic in, and the found- 
ing of the Second Empire, 407-418 ; 
and the making of the Kingdom of 
Italy, 426-429 ; Savoy and Nice 
ceded to, 429 ; Prussia's war with, 
439, 444, 450—451 ; Second Empire 
in, and the Franco-Prussian War, 
445-457; and Mexico, 447; under 
the Third Republic, 483-507 ; and 
Africa, 583, 585; and Egypt, 589; 
Andorra and, 593 ; and Greece, 612- 
613; and the Crimean War, 614; 
in Asia, 642 ; and China, 644, 648- 
649 ; and the World War, 682, 684- 
759; and the Triple Entente, 686; 
evacuation of, 761 ; and the Peace 
Conference, 776-779. 

Franche-Comte, France gains, 32. 

Francis I, Emperor of Austria, 264. 
See also Francis II. 

Francis II ("Holy Roman Empire), 
France declares war against, 166- 
168; retires from Vienna, 259; be- 
comes Francis I (Austria), 264; and 
Metternich, 319. 

Francis II (Naples), 430-432. 

Francis Ferdinand, Archduke of Aus- 
tria, assassinated, 680-682. 

Francis Joseph I (Austria), accession 
of, 398; and Hungary, 399, 515- 
519, 525; reign of, 515-526; decides 
to incorporate Bosnia and Herze- 
govina, 666. 

Franco-German War, 451-457; com- 
pletes unification of Germany, 458. 

Frankfort, Diet of, 320-321, 323, 405, 
459 ; German National Assembly 
at, 396 ; Parliament of, 401-405, 



435) 438, 461 ; annexed to Prussia, 
443 ; Treaty of, 455-456, 469, 483. 

Frederick II (the Great), 62-69, 79) 
82 ; Napoleon visits tomb of, 268. 

Frederick III (German Emperor), 
461, 471-472. 

Frederick William I (Prussia), 63-64. 

Frederick William II, 69. 

Frederick William III (Prussia), and 
Napoleon, 266-268; abolishes serf- 
dom, 289; makes alliance with 
Russia, 296 ; enters Paris, 299 ; 
promises constitution, 321 ; perse- 
cutes the Liberals, 323. 

Frederick William IV, rejects the work 
of the Frankfort Parliament, 403- 
405; and the "humiliation of 01- 
miitz," 405 ; grants a constitution, 

405-. 
Frederick William, German Crown 

Prince, 758. 
Free trade, England and, 358-360, 

467; Holland and, 376; Germany 

and, 467. 
French, Sir John, 699. 
French Congo, 492; Germany and, 

soy- 
French Guiana, 496, 503. 
French Revolution (1789), 3-4, 49, 
84; England and, 56; the "philos- 
ophers" and, 105-112; beginnings 
of, 1 13-138; the political clubs and, 
160—166; and the war in Europe, 
166-167; and the September Mas- 
sacres, 172-174; and the Conven- 
tion, 175—206; Napoleon and, 241— 
243 ; influence of, in South Ger- 
many, 266; Metternich and, 317; 
effect of, in Italy, 325; influence 
of, 339; of 1830, 372-374) 375-382; 
of 1848, 389-39O) 392- 
French Soudan, 505. 
Friedland, battle of, 269. 
Fulton, and the Clermont, 335. 
Fundamental Laws (Finland), 640- 
641. 

Gabelle, 93-94. 

Gaeta, 432. 

Gag Laws, 346. 

Galicia, Austria and, 284; Poles in, 

521; Russians invade, 695, 700- 

702 ; "drive" in, 729. 
GaUipoli Campaign, 702-703. 



INDEX 



835 



Gambetta, Leon, and Napoleon III, 
449-450; and the Third Republic, 
453-455, 483, 490-491; death of, 
493 ; and the clerical party, 500. 

Gapon, Father, 656. 

Garibaldi, Anita, 430. 

Garibaldi, Giuseppe, and Young Italy, 
421, 430; and the making of the 
kingdom of Italy, 430-433. 

Gaza, 229. 

Geneva Commission, 535. 

Genoa, a republic, 49, 57, 78; and 
Corsica, 209 ; becomes the Ligurian 
Republic, '219; Napoleon and, 223; 
IMassena and, 239 ; ceded to King 
of Piedmont, 308, 312, 325; Maz- 
zini and, 419-420; Garibaldi and, 
432. 

George I (England), 51-52. 

George I (Greece), 624-625. 

George II (England), 51-52. 

George III (England), 53-5.6, 331; 
death of, 346; and Australia, 570. 

George IV (England), reign of, 346- 

347- 

George Y (England), accession of, 
556 ; and the Parliament Bill, 558. 

George, Prince, and Crete, 625. 

Gerard, Ambassador, 723-725. 

German Confederation, established, 
320—321, 401—402; revived, 405, 
435; Holstein a member of, 440; 
Austria to withdraw from, 443. 

German East Africa, 469, 706. 

German Empire (Sec also Holy Roman 
Empire), Constitution of the new, 
458-481. 

German National Assembly, 395-396, 
401, 758. 

German Southwest Africa, 469, 706. 

Germans, in Austria, 319, 519; in Bo- 
hemia, 395-396; in Holstein and 
Schleswig, 440, 599; in Hungary, 
523; in Switzerland, 598; in the 
Baltic Provinces, 628. 

Germany, a collection of small states, 
59-60; and the problem of Alsace, 
160; states of, enter war against 
France, 1 79, 208 ; French driven out 
of, 231 ; transformation of, 262-266, 
269, 275 ; and the Erfurt Interview, 
281; Metternich and, 320-324; in- 
dustrial revolution in, 336 ; and the 
July Revolution, 375, 381-382; 



revolution in (1848), 395-396; de- 
feat of liberalism in, 401-406; uni- 
fication of, 435-444, 457; States of 
South, join the Confederation, 457; 
no parliamentary system in, 461 ; 
and the Kulturkampf, 462-463 ; 
and Socialism, 464-467 ; and pro- 
tection, 467-468; colonies of, 468- 
469 ; and the Triple Alliance, 469— 
471; William II and, 471-474; 
electoral system in, 475-479; chal- 
lenges the P'ntente Cordiale, 506- 
507 ; and Africa, 585 ; covets Bel- 
gium and Holland, 595 ; and Greece, 
612; and Japan, 648; and China, 
648-649; and the Hague Confer- 
ence, 662; and the breaches of the 
Treaty of Berlin, 666 ; and the 
Treaty of Bucharest, 679 ; prepares 
for war, 679; and the World War, 
683-756 ; sends ultimatum to Bel- 
gium, 687 ; invades Russia, 700- 
702 ; revolution in, 756-759 ; and 
the armistice, 761-764; problem of, 
765-767 ; and the treaty of Ver- 
sailles, 781-782; 795-809; consti- 
tution of the German Republic, 
816-820; problem of Germany, 
820-822. 

Gibraltar, England acquires, 47. 

Giolitti, and the Triple Alliance, 679. 

Girondists, personnel, 165-166; desire 
war, 167; and the Jacobins, 173, 
176-179, 181-182; twenty-nine ar- 
rested, 182; guillotined, 190; over- 
throw of, 192 ; Bonaparte and, 
244. 

Gladstone, and the extension of the 
suffrage, 362-364 ; First Ministry of, 
527-536 ; and Ireland, 529-534 ; and 
education, 534-535 ; other reforms 
of, 535-536 ; Second Ministry, 538- 
541; Third Ministry, 541-545; 
Fourth Ministry, 547-548 ; death of, 
548; and the Transvaal, 576-577; 
and the Soudan, 590-591 ; and the 
Bulgarian atrocities, 617. 

Gneist, Rudolph, 479. 

Godoy, 276. 

Goethe, 281, 322, 767. 

Golitzin, Prime Minister, 728. 

Gordon, General, 590-591. 

Gorgei, 399. 

Gorizia, 712, 735. 



836 



INDEX 



Gork}^, and Brest-Litov^sk, 740. 
Gortchakoff, and the Congress of Ber- 
lin, 470. 
Gouraud, General, 751. 
Gramont, and the Hohenzollern can- 
didacy, 452. 
Grand Monarch. See Louis XIV. 
Grand Remonstrance, lo-ii. 

Grattan, 542. 

Great Britain. Sec England. 

"Great Commoner." See Pitt, Earl 
of Chatham. 

Great Elector (Prussia), 62. 

Great Khan, 70. 

Great Saint Bernard Pass, 239. 

Great WeslerK, sails from Bristol to 
New York, 335. 

Greece, and Turkey, 610, 625 ; and the 
war of independence, 611-612; 
foreign intervention for, 612—613; 
kingdom of, 613, 624-625 ; England 
cedes Ionian Islands to, 625 ; an- 
nexes Thessaly, 625 ; and Crete, 
666, 673; Macedonian Christians 
and, 669 ; and the Balkan Wars of 
1912 and 1913, 671-677; and the 
World War, 703-705, 727, 753; 
and the Peace Conference, 776- 
778. ~ 

Greek Orthodox Church. See Cath- 
olic Church (Greek). 

Green, his opinion of James I, 5 ; 
Short History of the English People 
by, censored in Russia, 639. 

Gregory XVI (Pope), recovers prov- 
inces, 381. 

Grenoble, 302. 

Grevy, Jules, chosen president, 491 ; 
resigns, 493. 

Grey, Earl, and the Reform Bill of 
1832, 347-352. 

Grey, Sir Edward, and the Treaty of 
Berlin, 667. 

Guadeloupe, 502. 

Guam, 469. 

Guastalla, Duchess of, 261. 

Guatemala, 776. 

Guiana, 503, 564. 

Guilds, in France, 101-102, 118, 134, 
242. 

Guinea, 504. 

Guizot Ministry, 386-390. 

Gulflight, 720. 

Gustavus V (Sweden), 604. 



Haakon VII (Norway), 603. 

Haase, 766. 

Habeas Corpus, 105 ; suspended, 346. 

Hague, International Arbitration Tri- 
bunal, 603, 662; Conferences, 661- 
664, 718, 775. 

Haig, General, 699, 710-71 1; issues 
special order, 743. 

Haiti, 776. 

Hallam, Arthur, 528. 

Ham, 412, 742. 

Hamburg, 275, 286; American Line, 
335; a republic, 460; establishes 
trading stations, 468 ; revolution in, 

757- 

Hamilton, Sir Ian, 703. 

Hampden, John, and Charles I, 7-9, 
II. 

Hanover, House of, and England, 50- 
56, 440; Napoleon seizes, 257; aids 
Austria against Prussia, 441-442 ; 
King of, taken prisoner, 442 ; an- 
nexed to Prussia, 443 ; revolution 
in, 758. 

Hapsburg, House of. See Austria. 

Hardenberg, 288. 

Hargreaves, James, 333. 

Harrison, Frederic, concerning Crom- 
well, 23. 

Hebert, and the Pere Duchesne, 192- 
193 ; guillotined, 195. 

Hebertists, 195. 

Hedjaz, Kingdom of, 776. 

Hedlev, William, and the Puffing 
Billy, 336. 

Heidelberg, 766. 

Helgoland, England and, 311, 564; 
British naval victory near, 698; to 
be dismantled, 804. 

Henry IV (France), and the Edict of 
Nantes, 34. 

"Henry V" (France), 487. 

Henry, Colonel, 496. 

Herder, 767. 

Hertling (Chancellor), 473. 

Herzegovina, Austria "occupies," 470, 
619; Austria annexes, 526, 666, 670, 
680, 683 ; insurrection in, 6x6. 

Hesse-Cassel, revolution in, 381 ; aids 
Austria against Prussia, 441-442 ; 
Elector of, taken prisoner, 442 ; 
annexed to Prussia, 443. 

Hesse-Darmstadt, aids Austria against 
Prussia, 441. 



INDEX 



837 



High Court of Justice, and Charles I, 
16. 

Hindenburg, General von, and the 
battle of Tannenberg, 695 ; and the 
campaign in East Prussia, 700-702, 
703, 712, 727 ; and the Battle of the 
Somme, 710; succeeded by Luden- 
dprff, 743. 

"Hindenburg Line," 733; battle of 
the, 749-752. 

Hohenlinden, 240. 

Hohenlohe (Chancellor), 473. 

Hohenzollern candidacy, 451-452, 
605. 

Hohenzollern, House of. Set Prussia. 

Holland, England and, 24, 37, 240, 
311, 564, 575; and the Triple Al- 
liance, 30-31 ; Louis XIV and, 31- 
32, 47; Huguenots flee to, 36; 
republic in, 49 ; young Russians 
sent to, 72; and the war against 
France, 179, 205, 208; colonics of, 
240 ; Louis Bonaparte, King of, 260- 
261, 275; annexed to France, 275, 
286; and Belgium, 310, 312, 594; 
and the July Revolution, 375-378; 
New, 570 ; and Africa, 583 ; the Pan- 
Germans covet, 595 ; and China, 
644; William of Hohenzollern flees 
to, 759. 

Holstein, question of, 440; annexed 
to Prussia, 443, 598-600. 

Holy Alliance, 314-315; 328-330, 381, 
630. 

Holy Roman Empire, 47 ; free cities 
of, 49, 263, position of, altered, 263- 
266, 320. Sec also German3\ 

Home Rule Bill (Ireland), first, 543- 
545; second, 547; third, 559-561. 

Home Rule Movement, 541-542. 

Horns, 753. 

Honduras, 776. 

Hong Kong, ceded to England, 644 

Home, 751. 

House, Colonel Edward M., 778. 

Hudson Bay region, England acquires, 
47i 563, 566; the Dominion pur- 
chases, 569. 

Huguenots, 34-36. 

Humbert I (Italy), 510; assassinated, 
512. 

Hungary, Kingdom of, 319; and the 
revolution of 1848, 392-400, 515, 
630-631 ; and Francis Joseph I, 



515-519; Kingdom of, after 1867, 
522-525; demands independence, 
525-526; declares her independ- 
ence, 755. 

Huskisson, and the tariff, 346. 

Hymans, 778. 

Ibrahim, 612. 

Illiteracy, in Italy, 510; in Spain, 607 ; 
in Portugal, 608. 

Illyrian Provinces, 284; Austria and, 
311-. 

Imperial federation. Chamberlain and, 
548 ; British, 581-582. 

Imperial Germany, by Prince von 
Billow, 481. 

Imperial Parliament (German), com- 
position of, 458-461 ; and Socialism, 
465 ; electoral system of, 475-478 ; 
position and powers of the Reichs- 
tag, 478-481. 

Imperialism, Disraeli and, 536-538; 
the Unionists and, 545, 548, 552; 
Chamberlain and, 548-549. 

Indemnity, Act of (England), 343. 

Independence Party (Hungary), 525. 

Independents, in the English Civil 
War, 12, 15; and the Restoration, 
25- 

India, England acquires, 50, 563-566; 
Seven Years' War in, 53 ; Napoleon 
and, 226; Wellesley in, 2S0; French 
towns in, 502 ; Queen of England 
proclaimed Empress of, 537-538, 
565 ; government of, 565-566, 581 ; 
Turkey and, 696 ; and the World 
War, 737; and the Peace Confer- 
ence, 776. 

Indo-China, 504, 642. 

Industrial Revolution, in England, 
.59, 331-338, 344; in Russia, 638. 

Initiative, in Switzerland, 597. 

Inkermann, 614. 

Inter-allied Supreme W'ar Council, 
776. 

International African Association, 
586. 

Inquisition, in Spain, 282 ; in Italy, 
326. 

Instrument of Government, 23. 

Insurance, against sickness, accident 
and old age in Germany, 466. 

Intendants, 8q. 

International Labor Legislation, 778. 



838 



INDEX 



Ionian Islands, England and, 311, 
564; ceded to Greece, 625. 

Ireland, supports Charles II, 18; con- 
quered, 19; representation of, in the 
English Parliament, 340; famine of 
1845 in, 359-360, 531-532; Glad- 
stone and, 529-534, 541-545, 547; 
Cromwell and, 530; Home Rule 
and, 541-542, 547 ; and old age 
pensions. 552. 

"Ironsides," Cromwell's, 14, 20. 

Isabella II, Queen of Spain, 451, 604. 

Ismail, Khedive of Egypt, 537, 588- 

589. 

Isnard, 166. 

Isonzo, 735, 754. 

Istria, 221, 260, 514, 706, 755. 

Italia Irredenta, 514, 706. 

Italy, Austria gains territory in, 47 ; 
a collection of states, 57-59, 219; 
states of, enter war against France, 
179; campaign in, 209, 213-225; 
French driven out of, 230-231; 
second campaign in, 239-241 ; and 
the Code Napoleon, 247 ; Napoleon, 
king of, 253, 260, 269, 275, 286, 290; 
Austria receives northern, 311; 
after 1815, 325-327; and the July 
Revolution, 375, 381 ; revolution in 
the Austrian provinces of, 395-397 ; 
reconquered, 400-401, 515; war of 
1859 in, 418; the making of the 
Kingdom of, 419-434 ; and the 
Austro-Prussian War (1866), 441- 
443 ; seizes Rome, 456-457 ; and the 
Triple Alliance, 471, 511, 679, 685, 
705; and Tripoli, 506; since 1870, 
508-514; and Africa, 585; and the 
breaches of the Treaty of Berlin, 
666; invades Tripoli, 671 ; and Al- 
bania, 674; and Serbia, 679, 682, 
684 ; remains neutral, 690, 698 ; 
joins the Allies, 705-706 ; threat- 
ened, 711— 712; invasion of, 735- 
736 ; and Bulgaria, 753 ; victorious, 
754; and the Peace Conference, 
776-778. 

Jacobin Club, 161-163, 186, 197 ; 

Louis Philippe and, 382. 
Jacobins, and Girondists, 166, 173, 

176, 181-182; desire war, 167; 

against the King, 168, 178; and the 

government of Paris, 171; become 



masters of the Convention, 182; 
Robespierre and, 196 ; Bonaparte 
and, 244 ; in Paris, 484. 

Jaffa, 229, 737. 

Jagow, von, and the violation of Bel- 
gian neutrality, 689. 

Jamaica, England gains, 24, 563 ; 
slavery in, 354- . . 

James I, and the divine right of kings, 

4-5- 

James II (England), 25-26; over- 
thrown, 37. 

Jameson Raid, 578. 

Janina, fall of, 673. 

Japan, early history of, 644-647 ; and 
the war with China, 647-650 ; and 
Russia, 650-654; and the Hague 
Conference, 661 , and the World 
War, 697-698, and the Peace Con- 
ference, 776. 

Jaroslav, captured, 695. 

Jassy, seat of the Roumanian govern- 
ment, 713. 

Java, 595. 

Jellachich, 398. 

Jellicoe, Admiral, 716. 

Jemappes, 382. 

Jena, battle of, 268, 288. 

Jerusalem, captured, 737, 752. 

Jesuits, favored by Frederick the 
Great, 68 ; expelled from Germany, 
462. 

Jews, under Louis XVI, 103 ; in South 
Germany, 266 ; in England, 343 ; 
and the Dreyfus case, 498 ; in Rou- 
mania, 623 ; in Russia, 628, 637, 
655, 659, 728; in Turkey, 696. 

Joffre, General, 692, 710. 

Johannesburg, 577. 

Josephine, Empress, and Napoleon, 
211-213, 221, 253, 259, 269; mar- 
riage of, dissolved, 285. 

Jourdan, 209. 

Juarez, 448. 

Jugo-Slavia, 770, 813. 

July 14, 1789, 130 ; declared a national 
holiday, 492. 

July Monarchy, 384-386. 

July Ordinances (1830), 371-372. 

July Revolution (1830), 372-374; 
influence of, 375-382 ; of 1908 (Tur- 
key), 625-627, 664-665. 

June 20, 1792, 168, 211. 

June 2, 1793, insurrection of, 182. 



INDEX 



839 



June Days (1848), 410-41 1. 
Junot, 280. 

Jury, introduced (France), 146; Kos- 
suth demands trial by, 393. 
Jutland, naval battle of, 715-717. 

Kaledin, General, 732. 

Kalisch, Treaty of, 296. 

Kamerun, Germany and, 469, 507, 

706. 
Karageorge, 611. 
Karl, Emperor (Austria-Hungary), 

755- 
Kars, 740. 

Kerensky, 728-730, 739. 
Khartoum, 590-591. 
Kiauchau, 648, 697, 706. 
Kiel, harbor of, 441 ; Treaty of, 598, 

602 ; German fleet in, Canal, 698, 

716; mutiny at, 756; and treaty of 

Versailles, 804. 
"King of Rome," 285; death of, 412. 
Kioto, 648. 

Kirk Kilisse, battle of, 672, 675. 
Kitchener, Lord, and the Soudan, 549, 

591 ; and the Boer War, 580. 
Kleber, 227, 230. 
Koniggratz, battle of, 442, 445, 450, 

594- 

Korea, and the Chino- Japanese War, 
647, 650; Japan invades, 651-652; 
annexed by Japan, 652. 

Kossuth, Francis, 525. 

Kossuth, Louis, and the Hungarians, 
392-395, 398-399; flees to Turkey, 
399- 

Kotzebue, 323. 

Kramar, 778. 

Kruger, Paul, President of the Trans- 
vaal, 579. 

Kiihlmann, 739. 

Kulturkampf, 462-463. 

Kumanovo, 672. 

Kunersdorf, battle of, 67. 

Kuropatkin, General, 651. 

Kut-el-Amara, 737. 

Labor, England and child, 353-354; 
English, legislation, 360-362, 546, 
548; Commission (France), 408; 
Party (England), 552, 556; legisla- 
tion (New Zealand), 574. 

La Bruyere, 46. 



Ladrone Islands, 469. 

Lafaj'ette, and the events of Oct. 5 
and 6, 1789, 136; and the Declara- 
tion of the Rights of Man, 140-141 ; 
and Louis Philippe, 374, 384. 

La Fontaine, and Louis XIV, 36, 45- 
46. 

Laibach, Congress of, 328. 

Lamartine, 166, 387 ; head of the Pro- 
visional Government, 390, 407- 
408 ; and the National Assembly, 
410. 

Land, Act of 1870 (Ireland), 533-534, 
539; Act of 1881, 539-540, 545; 
Purchase Bill (Gladstone), 543-545 ; 
Purchase Act (Salisbury), 545-546, 
548; Act of 1903, 546. 

Landesgcmeinde cantons, 597. 

Landtag (Prussian), 475. 

Languedoc, 132. 

Lannes, 227. 

Lansing, Secretary, 725, 778. 

Laon, 751. 

Lassalle, Ferdinand, and Socialism, 
464-465. 

Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, ex- 
ecuted, 10. 

Lausanne, Treat}' of, 671. 

Law of Associations, 500. 

Law of Papal Guarantees, 509. 

League of Augsburg, 47 ; of Nations, 
774-779; 782-795; to enforce Peace, 

774- 
Lebrun, 238. 

Leeds, unrepresented, 343. 
Legendre, 168. 

Legion of Honor, founded, 248 ; Drey- 
fus and, 498. 
Legislative Assembly, 156-174. 
Legislative Body (France), 238, 416; 

convened, 453. 
Legislative Chamber, Napoleon III 

and, 449. 
Legitimacy, doctrine of, 310, 312. 
Legitimists (France), 384, 487. 
Leipsic, battle of, 297, 749; Saxony 

retains, 310-31 1. 
Lemberg, captured, 695, 702. 
Lenine, 730. 

Lenthall, Speaker, to Charles I, 11. 
Leo XIII (Pope), and Bismarck, 463; 

refuses to recognize the Kingdom 

of Italy, 510. 
Leoben, Truce of, 218-219. 



INDEX 



Leopold I (Belgium), and Queen Vic- 
toria, 356; crowned, 377. 

Leopold II (Belgium), and Congo 
Free State, 586-588. 

Leopold of Hohenzollern, and Spain, 
451-452, 605. 

Lese-majeste, 474. 

Lesseps, Ferdinand de, 588. 

Lettres de cachet, 85, 105, 109, 123, 130. 

Liao-tung peninsula, 647-648, 651- 
652. 

Liao-yang, battle of, 651. 

Liberal-Unionists, 544-545. 

Liberals, in Germany, 321-322, 401- 
406 ; in Spain, 329 ; in England, 364, 
527; in Italy, 423; in Prussia, 439; 
Napoelon III and, 449-451 ; and 
Home Rule, 544 ; in power (Eng- 
land) after 1905, 552; blocked by 
the House of Lords, 554-556; in 
Portugal, 608 ; in Russia punished, 
630. 

Liberia, and the World War, 727 ; and 
the Peace Conference, 776. 

Liberty, restricted in France, 105 ; 
Napoleon and, 243 ; religious, es- 
tablished in South Germany, 265 ; 
religious, in Great Britain, 343 ; 
civil, in Germany, 402. 

Licensing Bill, defeated by House of 
Lords, 553- 

Liebknecht, Socialist leader, 464, 766- 
767. 

Liechtenstein, 593. 

Liege, taken, 691. 

Liggett, General, 751. 

Ligurian Republic. See Genoa. 

Lille, 751. 

Lisbon, 276, 280; revolution in, 608. 

Lissa, battle at, 443. 

Lithuania, overrun, 702 ; Germans 
control, 732 ; and Brest-Litovsk, 
740. 

Liverpool, 335-336, 528. 

Livingstone, David, 584-585. 

Livonia, Russia acquires, 72, 628; and 
Brest-Litovsk, 740. 

Li Yuan-Lung, 654. 

Lloyd George, premier, 551; and the 
budget of 1909, 553-556; asks for 
American reinforcements, 745 ; and 

• the Peace Conference, 778; com- 
ments of, on treaty of Versailles, 
806-807. 



Lobau, Island of, 284. 

Lodi, 215, 217-218. 

Lombardo-Venetian Kingdom, 311, 
319, 325-326; declares its inde- 
pendence, 396, 515; Austria loses, 
526. 

Lombardy, Austria and, 209, 215, 221, 
312, 515; revolts, 395; Piedmont 
and, 427, 428 ; illiteracy in, 510. 

Lombardy-Venetia. See Lombardo- 
Venetian Kingdom. 

Lomenie de Brienne, 120. 

London, Charles I leaves, 1 1 ; Crom- 
well returns to, 20 ; and the plot 
against Napoleon, 249-250 ; riots in, 
350; and the Chartist agitation, 
357; conference in, recognizes in- 
dependence of Belgium, 377; Tel- 
egraph, 478 ; Times, 497 ; colonial 
conference in, 549 ; and old age 
pensions, 552; Treaty of (1827), 
613; Treaty of (1913), 673-674; 
Treaty of (1373), 7i5- 

Long Parliament, 10-15 5 dissolved by 
Cromwell, 21—22. 

Lord Protector, Cromwell, 23. 

Lords, House of, ceases to exist, 18; 
restored, 25; in 181 5, 340; defeats 
second Reform Bill, 350-351; and 
the Reform Bill of 1832, 351 ; Irish 
bishops lose seats in, 532 ; defeats 
second Home Rule Bill, 547 ; Glad- 
stone attacks, 547-548, 556 ; defeats 
Liberal measures, 553 ; and the 
budget of 1909, 553-556 ; veto, 556- 
559, 561. 

Loris-Melikoff, 636-637. 

Lorraine, 132; Germans invade, 453; 
France cedes a large part of, 455- 
456, 469, 483 ; France recovers, 761- 

763- , 

Loubet, Emile, 495 ; and Dreyfus, 497. 

Louis I (Bavaria), 613, 624. 

Louis XIII, and Africa, 503. 

Louis XIV, and Cromwell, 24; France 
under, 27-48, 113, 550. 

Louis XV, reign of, 49, 56, 113, 
502. 

Louis XVI, reign of, 49, 85, 87, 92, 
105 ; and Protestantism, 103 ; and 
the beginnings of the Revolution, 
1 13-138; accepts the new constitu- 
tion, 142-144, 238; and the Civil 
Constitution of the Clergy, 150- 



INDEX 



841 



151 ; attempted escape of, 1 51-15 2 ; 

restored, 154; distrust of, 157-159; 

intrigues of, 164-165, 168; and the 

events of August 10, 1792, 169-172 ; 

and the Convention, 175—206; trial 

and execution of, 177-179. 
Louis XVIII, 244; proclaimed king, 

299-310; flees, 302; reign of, 366- 

369 ; Alexander I and, 629. 
Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, 358, 411- 

415. See Napoleon III. 
Louis Philippe, King of France, 374- 

375; and Belgium, 377; and Italy, 

381; reign of, 382-390; overthrow 

of, 390; and Algeria, 503. 
Louise, Queen (Prussia), 266, 436. 
Louvois, minister of war, 28-30. 
Louvre, Museum of, 206, 223. 
I^owe, Robert, 364. 
Liibeck, 275, 286 ; a republic, 460. 
Lucca, 261, 325. 
Ludendorff, General, 743, 751. 
Lule Burgas, battle of, 672, 675. 
Luneville, Treaty of, 240, 256, 262. 
Lusitania, sunk, 706, 720-721. 
Lutherans, in the Baltic provinces, 

628. 
Lutsk, captured, 712. 
Liitzen, battle of, 297. 
Luxembourg Palace, 408. 
Luxemburg, a neutralized state, 593— 

594, 687 ; German troops occupy, 

688; evacuation of, 761. 
Luxemburg, Rosa, 766-767. 
Lvoff, Prince, ministry of, 728-729. 
Lyons, 182, 188-189. 
Lytton, Lord, Viceroy of India, 565. 

Macaulay, T. B., and representation 
in the House of Commons, 350 ; and 
Gladstone, 529. 

Macaulay, Zachary, 353. 

Macedonia, 617, 619; Bulgaria and, 
622 ; Serbia and, 625 ; Greece and, 
625 ; the Young Turks and, 669- 
670, 672; and the Balkan wars of 
1912 and 1913, 672-677. 

Machiavelli, 65. 

Mack, General, 258-259. 

Mackensen, General von, 700-702, 
712; invades Serbia, 704; and 
Roumania, 713. 

MacMahon, Marshal, elected presi- 
dent, 487-488; policy of, 490-491 ; 



resigns, 491 ; Roman Catholic 
Church and, 500. 

Madagascar, France and, 492, 505. 

Madeira, 608. 

Madrid, Louis sends "Treatise" to, 
30; Napoleon enters, 282. 

Maeterlinck, Maurice, on the German 
invasion of Belgium, 695. 

Magdeburg, 758. 

Magenta, battle of, 427, 515. 

Magna Charta, 3. 

Magyars, the clominant race, in Hun- 
gary, 319, 397-398; Francis Joseph 
I and, 515—516; oppose demands of 
Czechs in Bohemia, 519-520 ; policy 
of, 522-525. 

Mahdi, the, 590. 

Mahratta confederacy, 564. 

Majority Socialists, 766-767. 

Majuba Hill, 576-577, 579. 

Malesherbes, 105. 

Malplaquet, 47. 

Malta, 228, 240; England and, 311, 
564- 

Mamelukes, 228. 

Manchester, 335-336; unrepresented, 
343 ; and the Anti-Corn Law 
League, 359. 

Manchuria, Japanese invade, 647 ; 
Russia and, 649-650, 652. 

Manifesto, of August 19, 1905 (Rus- 
sia), 656; of October 30, 1905, 

Manin, Daniel, and Venice, 395. 

Manitoba, 567. 

Mantua, 215-217, 218. 

Manuel II (Portugal), 608. 

Maoris, 573. 

Marat, a monarchist, 154; incites the 

September massacres, 173; and the 

Jacobins, 176; acquitted, 181; 

Charlotte Corday and, 192. 
March Days, 395-396, 405 ■ 
March Laws (Hungary), 394-396, 

398. 
Marchand, 506. 
Marches, the, Victor Emmanuel II 

and, 432-433. 
Marengo, 240, 243, 245, 249. 
Maria Christina, Regent of Spain, 

606. 
Maria Theresa, Empress of Austria, 

61, 80, 115. 
Marie, Minister of Commerce, 409. 



842 



INDEX 



Marie Antoinette, Queen, 113, 115- 
ii?^ 135; S'lid Turgot, 118; and the 
flight to Varennes, 151-152 ; in- 
trigues of, 164-165, 168; impris- 
oned, 172; executed, 190-192, 285. 

Marie Louise, Archduchess of Aus- 
tria, marries Napoleon, 285 ; re- 
ceives Duchy of Parma, 312. 

Maritime Pro\-ince, Russia acquires, 
642. 

Maritza, 617. 

Marlborough, \actories of, 47 

Marmont, 214, 227. 

Marne, Battle of the, 692-693, 695, 
699, 707; Germans cross the, 744; 
Second Battle of the, 747-749. 

Marseilles, 182, 189, 503. 

Marston ISIoor, battle of, 14. 

Martinique, 502. 

Marx, Karl, and Socialism, 464. 

Marj- (daughter of James II) and the 
Glorious Revolution, 25-26, 50. 

Massachusetts Baj', founded, 12. 

"Massacre of the boulevards," 414. 

Massawa, 511. 

Massena, 213, 239, 243. 

Maude, General, 737. 

Mauritius, 353, 564. 

Maximilian (Archduke of Austria), 
and Mexico, 448-449. 

Maximilian, Prince (Baden), 473. 

Maximilian, Prince, Ex-Chancellor, 

765- 

May Laws, 462-463. 

Maj'ence, 762, 763. 

Mazarin, 27, 37-40. 

Mazurian Lakes, Battle of the, 700. 

Mazzini, Joseph, and "Young Itah'," 
419-421; and the making of Italy, 
422 ; and Cavour, 424. 

Mehemet Ali, 588, 612. 

Melas, 239. 

Melbourne, Lord, and the first Re- 
form Bill, 347 ; and Queen Victoria, 
356. 

Memel, 798. 

Meredith, and Paris, 776. 

Mesopotamia, Turkey and, 696; ex- 
pedition to, 737, 753 ; problem of, 
770. 

Messines ridge, 743. 

Metric system, in France, 206. 

Metternich, and the Congress of 
Vienna, 308, 312; and the Quad- 



ruple Alliance, 315-317; Napoleon 
on, 317; policy of, 319-320; and 
Germany. 320-324; and the "right 
of inters-ention," 327-330; and the 
July Revolution of 1830, 375, 382; 
flees to England, 390, 394; and 
Alexander I, 630. 

Metz, besieged, 453 ; fall of, 455 ; 
France cedes, 455 ; IMarshal Petain 
enters, 762. 

Mexico, Napoleon III and, 447-449 ; 
and the Hague Conference, 661 ; 
and the World War, 725. 

Michaelis (Chancellor), 473. 

Middle Europe, 713, 737, 753-754- 

Midia, 673. 

Milan, Austria gains, 47, 209 ; Napo- 
leon and, 215, 223; Decrees, 274; 
occupied, 427. 

Milan, King of Serbia, 623-624. 

IMilitarism, spread of, 660-662 ; and 
treaty of Versailles, 801-805. 

MiHtary School (France), 496, 498. 

Mill, John Stuart, and woman suf- 
frage, 364. 

Milosch Obrenovitch, 611. l 

Milton, and toleration, 15 ; on the I 
death of Charles I, 16 ; and Crom- 
well, 20. 

Milj'oukov, Professor, 639, 728-729. 

Minorca, England acquires, 47. 

Minority Socialists, 766-767. 

Miquelon, 502. 

Mir, in Russia, 629, 633. 

Mirabeau, on Prussia, 62 ; impris- 
oned, 105, 130; defies the King, 127 ; 
on the Constitution of 1791, 147; 
and the royal flight, 151. 

Misitch, General, 704. 

Missolonghi, siege of, 612-613. 

Modena, Duke of, 219, 223; duchy 
of, 221 ; Austria and, 312, 325-326; 
revolution in, 3S1, 428-429. 

Mohammed V (Sultan), 668. 

Mohammedans, in Russia, 628. 

Molda\aa, practically independent, 
613; independent, 615. See Rou- 
mania. 

Moliere, 45. 

Moltke, General von, 442-443. 

Mommsen, on Germany, 481. 

Monaco, 325. 

Monarchists (France), and the Third 
Republic, 483-484, 486-488, 490- 



INDEX 



843 



491, 494; and the Dreyfus case, 
498; in Spain, 606. 

Monastir, captured, 672. 

^londovi, 215. 

Mongols, and Russia, 70. 

Monroe, James (Pres. of U. S.), and 
the Monroe Doctrine, 330. 

Mons, taken, 692. 

Montalembert, 412. 

Montbeliard, County of, 34. 

Montcalm, defeated by Wolfe, 53. 

Montdidier, 742. 

Montebello, 219. 

Montenegro, Turkey and, 610, 617; 
and the Treaty of San Stefano, 617 ; 
independent of Turkey, 619-620; 
and the Balkan Wars of 191 2 and 
1913, 672-677 ; and the World War, 
696, 698, 704, 707 ; and Jugo- 
slavia, 770; and the Peace Confer- 
ence, 776. 

Montesquieu, loi, 106-108, no, 143, 
184. 

Montijo, Mile. Eugenie de, marries 
Napoleon III, 416. 

Montreal, 566. 

Morea, 612-613. 

Moreau, 209, 217, 239-240. 

Morley, Lord, on the execution of 
Charles I, 16 ; and Irish Home Rule, 

543- 

Morocco, France and, 505-507 ; Tur- 
key and, 583 ; Spain and, 607. 

Moscow, capital of Russia, 70, 74; 
retreat from, 293-295 ; university 
of, 640; strike in, 727. 

Mount Kemmel, 743. 

Mt. Tabor, 229. 

Mountain, the, 1 76. See also Jacobins. 

Mukden, 651. 

Munich, 765. 

Municipal government (England), 
reform of, 355. 

Murat, Joachim, brings cannon to the 
Tuileries, 204; and Napoleon, 227, 
230, 234, 243, 293 ; marries, 261 ; 
in Spain, 276; becomes King of 
Naples, 278, 286. 

Muscovy, Principality of. See Russia. 

Namur, occupied, 691-692. 
Nancy, Bishop of, 132. 
Nanking, Treaty of, 644; Republic 
proclaimed at, 653. 



Nantes, Edict of, 24, 34 ; revoked, 
35-37, 47, 103; city of, 189. 

Naples, Austria, gains, 47 ; Napoleon 
and, 260; Austria and, 325-326; 
revolution of 1820 in, 327-328; aids 
revolt against Austria, 395 ; ruler 
of, deserts the cause, 396 ; conquest 
of the Kingdom of, 429-432 ; an- 
nexed to the Kingdom of Italy, 
433; illiterates in, 510. 

Napoleon, and the Holy Roman Em- 
pire, 60 ; and the sack of the Tuile- 
ries, 171; defends the Convention, 
204—205; early life of, 209-225; 
campaign in Italy, 213-225; Egyp- 
tian Ex-pedition, 225-229; resolves 
to return to France, 229-231 ; plots 
a coup d'etat, 231-235; and the 
Consulate, 236-250; sovereign, 238; 
second Italian campaign of, 239- 
241 ; political \-ie\vs of, 241-243 ; as 
a ruler, 243-245 ; and the Catholic 
Church, 245-247, 500; Code Napo- 
leon, 247-248 ; other reforms of, 
248 ; and the royahsts, 249 ; Em- 
peror, 250-285 ; personal charac- 
teristics, 251-256; and the Third 
Coalition, 256-258 ; defeats Aus- 
tria, 258-260; the king-maker, 
260-262 ; and the transformation of 
Germany, 262-266 ; and the con- 
quest of Prussia, 266-268, 270-271 ; 
and Russia, 268-269, 281 ; and 
Spain, 282, 324; and Austria, 282— 
284; marries Marie Louise of 
Austria, 284-285 ; decline and fall 
of, 2861-306; forced to abdicate, 
299; and Elba, 299, 301-303; and 
the "Hundred Days," 303; and 
Waterloo, 303 ; and St. Helena, 305- 
306, 317; death of, 306. 

Napoleon III (Emperor of the French), 
415-418; and the making of the 
Kingdom of Italy, 426-429, 432; 
and the Austro-Prussian war, 445- 
447 ; and Mexico, 447-449 ; and the 
Liberals, 449-451 ; and the Franco- 
German War, 452-454; the Bona- 
partists desire, 487; and Senegal, 
503-504. 

Naseby, battle of, 14. 

Nassau, aids Austria against Prussia, 
441 ; annexed to Prussia, 443. 

National Assembly (1789), Third 



844 



INDEX 



Estate declares itself, 126-127; 
nobility and clergy join, 128; be- 
comes Constituent Assembly, 128, 
140; of 1871, 483, 485-486. 

National Constituent Assembly (1848), 
407, 410-413. _ 

National Council (Switzerland), 596. 

National Defense, Government of, 

453-454, 483- 

National Guard, organized, 130; at 
Paris, 152; in Vendee, 157; Louis 
Philippe and, 389. 

National workshops, in France, 388, 
408-411. 

Nationality, Napoleon and, 288 ; Con- 
gress of Vienna and, 314; in Ger- 
many, 321 ; in Belgium, 376 ; Poland 
and, 378-379, 634; in Hungary, 
392, 397; Napoleon III and, 427, 
447; in Austria-Hungary, 519; in 
Ireland, 541; in Australia, 571; in 
South Africa, 581 ; in Schleswig, 
599; Roumania and, 712-713. 

Naumann, Dr. Friedrich, and the 
Reichstag, 480. 

Navarino, 613. 

Navigation Act (1651), 24. 

Necker, financial reforms of, 118— 120, 
122; dismissed, 128, 130. 

Nelson, Admiral, 228, 271-272. 

Netherlands. Ste Austrian Nether- 
lands and Belgium and Holland. 

Neuilly, treaty of, 814. 

Neuilly Wood, 744. 

Neuve Chapelle, Battle of, 699. 

New Brunswick, England and, 563, 
566; and the Dominion, 567. 

Newcomen, 331-332. 

Newfoundland, England acquires, 47, 
563, 566. 

New Guinea, 469. 

New South Wales, 570-571, 573. 

New York Herald, sends Stanley to 
Africa, 584. 

New Zealand", discovered, 570; gov- 
ernment of, 573 ; legislation of, 574; 
and the World War, 582, 703; and 
the Peace Conference, 776. 

Ney, 243, 269, 293. 

Nicaragua, 776. 

Nice, France and, 215, 427, 429. 

Nicholas I (Russia), aids Francis 
Joseph I, 399; death of, 615; reign 
of, 630-631. 



Nicholas II (Russia), reign of, 639- 
641, 656-659; and the Hague Con- 
ferences, 661-664 ; overthrown, 727- 
728. 

Nicholas, Grand Duke (Russia), sent 
to the Caucasus, 702. 

Nieuport, and the battle line, 693, 700. 

NihUism, rise of, 635-636. 

Nikolsburg, Peace of, 441. 

Nile, battle of the, 228 ; sources of the, 

584. 

Nimwegen, Peace of, 32, 34. 

Nivelle, General, 710. 

Noailles, Viscount of, 132. 

Nobility, in France under the Old 
Regime, 95, 97-100; in the States- 
General, 123-128; in Russia, 292, 
628-629, 631-633; in Austria, 319; 
in England, 340-344; in Hungary, 
392; in Sweden, 601; of Norway 
abolished, 602. 

Nogi, General, 651. 

Non-juring priests, origin of, 150; 
revolt, 157; deported, 168; mur- 
dered, 173; guillotined, 190. 

North, Lord, ministry of, 55-56. 

North America, expulsion of France 
from, 47 ; British Colonies in, 566- 

569- 
North German Confederation, 443- 

444, 594 ; States of South Germany 

join, 457 ; and the German Empire, 

458. 
North German Lloyd, 335. 
Norway, joined with Sweden, 312, 

598, 600-603 ; separates from 

Sweden, 603-604. 
Notre Dame, 194, 253, 302. 
Nottingham, Charles I at, 11. 
Novara, battle of, 328, 400, 423. 
Nova Scotia, England acquires, 47, 

53, 563, 566; and the Dominion, 

567- 
Noyon, 733, 742. 

O'Connell, and the repeal movement, 

531, 542. 
Oku, General, 651. 
Old Age Insurance Law (German), 

466. 
Old- Age Pensions, Act (England), 

551-552; Law (New Zealand), 574. 
Old Catholics (Germany), 462-463. 
Oldenburg, Grand Duchy of, 292, 758. 



INDEX 



84= 



Old Regime, in Europe, 80-83 ; in 
France, 84-112; Bonaparte and, 
241-243 ; in England, 339-345 ; not 
restored in France, 366. 

Old Sarum, 342. 

Olmiitz, humiliation of, 405. 

Omdurman, 591. 

Opium War, 643-644. 

Oral voting (Prussia), 477. 

Orange, House of. See Holland. 

Orange Free State, 575, 570-580. 

Orders in Council (England), 274. 

Oregon dispute, settled, 569. 

Orlando, 778. 

Orleanists, 487-488. 

Orleans, Duke of, intrigues of, 135 ; 
e.xecuted, 192, 382. 

Oscar H (Sweden and Norway), 601- 
604. 

Ostend, Germans seize, 693 ; Germans 
give up, 751. 

Ottawa, parliament at, 567. 

Otto I (Greece), 613, 624. 

Ottoman Empire, The Disruption of 
the, and the Rise of the Balkan 
States, 610-627; collapse of the, 
664-677. See also Turkey. 

Ouchy, Treaty of, 671. 

Oudh province, 565. 

Owen, Robert, and the Factory Act 
of 1833, 354. 

O.xford, University, 344, 528; religious 
tests abolished in, 535. 

Pachitch, 778. 

Palestine, Turkey and, 696 ; the 
British in, 737, 752-753; problem 
of, 770. 

Palmerston, Lord, and the first Re- 
form Bill, 347 ; and Italy, 429 ; on 
Cavour, 434. 

Panama, and the World War, 727; 
and the Peace Conference, 776. 

Papacy, Napoleon and, 290 ; Kingdom 
of Italy and, 508-510. 

Papal States, in the eighteenth cen- 
tury, 49; Napoleon and, 221, 275, 
286, 290; reestablished, 312, 325- 
326; revolution in, 381, 395-396; 
Piedmont and, 427, 429; Victor 
Emmanuel II leads army into, 423. 

Paris, and Louis XIV, 32; Peace of, 
53; capital of France, 85, 89, 223; 
paupers in, 102 ; parlement of, de- 



mands convocation of the States- 
General, 1 20 ; and the storming of 
the Bastille, 130; Louis XVI re- 
turns to, 136; Louis plans to escape 
from, 151-152; celebrates the end 
of the Revolution, 156; and the 
Jacobins, 161-162; insurrection in, 
169 ; revolutionary commune of, 
171-174, 181-184, 192-193, 195- 
202; and the Convention, 176-206; 
Law and Medical Schools of, 206 ; 
Napoleon and, 209—210, 213, 223, 
225, 230, 234-235, 268, 272, 295, 
301-302, 305-306 ; Museum of, 218 ; 
government centralized in, 239, 
263-264 ; ecclesiastical court in, 
285 ; the allies enter, 298-299 ; First 
Treaty of, 308 ; and the telegraph, 
2,ss ; and the July Revolution, 372- 
374; Poled in, 381; Louis Philippe 
and, 383, 389-390; Count of, 390, 
487; and the June Days, 410; and 
the coup d'etat of 1851, 413-415; 
modernized, 41 7 ; Congressof (1856), 
416, 426, 615; Siege of, 454-455; 
and the Commune, 483-485 ; gov- 
ernment moved to, 491 ; Treaty of 
(1898), 607; bombarded, 742; 
Peace Conference at, 776-809. 

Parlement, 100, 118; of Paris, 120- 
122. 

Parliament (English), development 
of, 2-4, 50-56; James I and, 4; 
Charles I and, 5-16; Short, 10; 
Long, 10-15, 21-22; Barebone's, 
23 ; becomes supreme, 26 ; sum- 
mons William of Orange to the 
throne, 37; in 1815, 339-343; and 
the Reform Bill of 1832, 347-352; 
and the Reform Bill of 1867, 362- 
364; and the Reform Bill of 1884, 
540-541 ; Home Rulers in English, 
542. 547, 556; Irish, granted to 
Ireland, 559; Canadian, 567; Aus- 
tralian, 573; South .\frica, 580-581. 

Parliament Bill (England), 191 1, 557- 
559, 561. 

Parma, Duke of, 219; duchy of, 221, 
312, 325-326; revolution in, 381, 
429. 

Parnell, Charles Stuart, and Home 
Rule, 542. 

Passchendaele Ridge, 735. 

Passive citizens, 144-145. 



846 



INDEX 



Patterson, Elizabeth, 262, 270. 

Peace, movement, 660-664; Making 
the, 760-822. 

Peasants, in France, 100-102. 

Peel, Sir Robert, reforms the Penal 
Code, 346 ; and the second Reform 
Bill, 350; and Queen Victoria, 356; 
and the repeal of the Corn Laws, 
360; and Gladstone, 529. 

Peking, 643, 647-649. 

Penal Code, reformed in England, 346. 

Peninsula War, 280-281. 

People's Charter, 356-358. 

Perier, Casimir, 495. 

Peronne, 711, 742. 

Perry, Commodore, and Japan, 645- 
646. • 

Pershing, General, 742. 

Persia, and the Hague Conference, 
661 ; future of, 770. 

Peru, 776. 

Pescadores Islands, 647. 

Retain, General, and Verdun, 708- 
710; enters Metz, 762. 

Peter I (Serbia), 624. 

Peter the Great, 70-76. 

Peter III (Russia), 76. 

Petition of Right, 8. 

Petrograd, strike in, 727 ; soviet in, 
728-729; and the Constituent As- 
sembly, 732. See also St. Peters- 
burg. 

Philip VI (Spain), 47-48. 

Philip Equality. See Orleans, Duke 
of. 

Philippe Egalite. See Orleans, Duke 
of. 

Philippine Islands, 607. 

Pi y Margall, 606. 

Piacenza, 215. 

Piave, retreat to the, 735, 754. 

Pichegru, 249. 

Pichon, 778. 

Picquart, Colonel, and Dreyfus, 496, 



Piedmont, 57 ; Emigres 
war against France, 
214-215; King of, 
after 1815, 325-326, 
war against Austria, 
401 ; Charles Albert 
tutional Statute, 405 
Crimean -War, 416, 
constitutional state, 



in, 151 ; in the 
205, 208-209, 
restored, 308; 
328; aids the 
395-397, 400^ 
grants Consti- 
, 423 ; and the 
426, 614; a 
423 ; a model 



state, 425 ; and the making of the 
Kingdom of Italy, 427-429; con- 
stitution of, altered, 508 ; illiteracy 
in, 510. 

Pillnitz, Declaration of, 158. 

Pitt, William, Earl of Chatham, 
Prime Minister of England, 52-53; 
and the American Revolution, 55. 

Pitt, William (the Younger), war 
leader, 240 ; desires reform, 339 ; on 
the House of Commons, 343 ; and 
the House of Commons, 349. 

Pius VI (Pope), 219, 223. 

Pius VII (Pope), and Louis XVIII, 
244; Bonaparte and, 245-246, 252, 
253, 275-276, 286, 290, 325, 500; 
after 1815, 326. 

Pius IX (Pope), flees, 400; temporal 
power of, abolished, 400, 456-457, 
462 ; and the May Laws (Germany), 
463; death of, 463, 510; and the 
Kingdom of Italy, 507-509. 

Pius X (Pope), 501. 

Plehve, 655. 

Plevna, siege of, 617, 623. 

Plombieres, interview at, 426-427. 

Plural voting (England), 541, 553. 

Poincare, President, and the Peace 
Conference, 778. 

Poitou, churches destroyed in, 35. 

Poland, government of, 49 ; partitions 
of, 68, 80, 82, 159, 268, 270, 284, 
310, 378-379, 628; Russia and, 77, 
292, 375 ; Alexander I and, 310-31 1, 
379-381, 629-630; and the July 
Revolution, 375, 378-381 ; King- 
dom of, 379 ; a promise of the Rus- 
sian Empire, 381, 630: Nicholas I 
and, 630, 634 ; Alexander II and, 
634 ; Russian, invaded, 702 ; Ger- 
mans control, 732; and Brest- 
Litovsk, 740; restoration of, 770; 
and the Peace Conference, 776-778; 
798-799. 

Poles, in Austria, 521 ; in Galicia, 521 ; 
in Germany oppressed, 599 ; in 
Russia oppressed, 659. 

Polignac ministry, 371. 

Pomerania, Prussia acquires, 311. 

Pondicherry, 502. 

Port Arthur, 647-649, 650-652, 656. 

Porte. See Turkey. 

Porto Rico, Spain and, 605, 607. 

Portsmouth (England), voters in, 354. 



INDEX 



84; 



Portsmouth (N. H.), Treaty of, 652. 

Portugal, Napoleon and, 276; revo- 
lution in, 327 ; and Africa, 583, 585- 
586; since 181 5, 608-609; and the 
European War, 609 ; and China, 
644; and the World War, 713-715, 
743 ; and the Peace Conference, 776. 

Posen, Prussia retains, 311. 

Potsdam, 268. 

Pragmatic Sanction, 82. 

Prague, revolt in, 396; Peace of 
(1866), 441, 450, 599; universities 
of, 521. 

Prairial, Law of 22d, 198-201. 

Presbyterians, in the English Civil 
War, 12, 15; and the Restoration, 
25 ; in Ireland, 529. 

Press, censored under Old Regime, 
85, 103 ; suppressed, 172 ; the Carls- 
bad Decrees and, 232; gagged in 
Spain, 324; Gag Laws (England) 
and, 346; free in France, 367; 
liberty of, suspended in France, 
371 ; liberty of, in Poland, 380, 629 ; 
in Germany, 382 ; in Hungary, 395 ; 
in Prussia (1849), 43^; Napoleon 
III and, 449; freedom of (1881), 
France, 492; in Spain, 604; in 
Russia, 630-631, 634, 637, 655. 

Pressburg, Treaty of, 259—260. 

Pretoria, 581. 

Pride's Purge, 15-16. 

Prince Edward Island, England and, 
563, 566; and the Dominion, 567. 

Prince Imperial, 416. 

Pripet Marshes, 712. 

"Protected Princes of India," 565. 

Protection, England and, 358-360, 
551; Belgium and, 376; Bismarck 
and, 467-468 ; Russia and, 638. 

Protectorate, The, 23-24. 

Protestantism, outlawed in France, 
103. 

Protestants, Louis XIV and, 34-37; 
in Holland, 376. 

Provence, Count of, 158. 

Provisional Government (France), 
390, 407, 483 ; and the socialists, 
407-410; in Russia, 728-730. 

Prussia, in the eighteenth century, 49, 
59-69 ; and the Seven Years' War, 
52; acquires Silesia, 80; and the 
Partition of Poland, 82, 292, 378; 
and the Emigres, 158; joins Aus- 



tria against France, 169, 172, 205; 
and Valm}^ 174; makes peace with 
France, 208; conquest of, 266-268, 
270-271; and the Continental Sys- 
tem, 275; reorganization of, 288; 
290; cooperates with Napoleon, 
293 ; Joins Russia against Napoleon, 
296 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 
308-314 ; and the Holy Alliance and 
the Quadruple Alliance, 315-316; 
King of, promises constitution, 321, 
395 ; Metternich and, 328-330; and 
the revolution of 1830, 375; and 
Belgium, 377; and German unity, 
401-405 ; receives a constitution, 
405-406, 435 ; three-class system of 
election in, 406, 476 ; reaction in, 
after 1849, 435-437; and the uni- 
fication of Germany, 435-444; 
army reform in, 436-439; and the 
war with Denmark, 440, 598-599; 
and the war with Austria, 441-444, 
598-599; and the North German 
Confederation, 444; and the year 
1866, 445; France declares war 
against, 452-457; King of, becomes 
German Emperor, 457-458, 461; 
and the Bundesrath, 459-460 ; and 
the Kulturkampf, 462 ; ascendancy 
of, 475 ; electoral system of, 475— 
479; and China, 644. 

Prussian Union (1849), 405. 

Przemysl, siege of, 695 ; fall of, 702. 

Punjab, annexed, 565. 

Puritans. Sec Independents. 

Puritan Revolution, 12. 

Pym, John, and Charles I, 7, 11. 

Pyramids, Battle of the, 228. 

Quadruple Alliance, and Metternich, 

315-316. 
Quakers, in England, 343. 
Quebec, 566. 
Queensland, 571. 
Quesnay, 106. 

Racine, 45. 

Radetzky, 396-397. 

Radoslavoff, 703. 

Ramolino, Laetitia, 209, 221. 

Rand, the, 577. 

Ravenna, 430. 

Rawlinson, 751. 

Reason, Worship of. See Worship. 



INDEX 



Referendum, in France, 183 ; in New 
Zealand, 574; in Switzerland, 597. 

"Reform banquets," 389-390. 

Reform Bill, of 1832, 347-352; of 
1867, 362-364, 527, 540; of 1884, 
540-541. 

Reichenau, 382. 

Reichsrath (Austrian Parliament), 
521. 

Reichstag, created, 444; its powers, 
458-460; Center party in, 462-463 ; 
Socialists in, 464, 466, 766 ; repre- 
sentation in, 478 ; impotence of, 
479-480; and the treaty of Brest- 
Litovsk, 741. 

Reign of Terror, 184-193, 195-196. 

Rennes, court-martial at, 496-498. 

Reparations, 778; Commission, 805- 
806. 

Representatives on Mission, 184; 
work of, 186. 

Republic, France proclaimed a, 175- 
177; under the Convention, 175- 
206 ; under the Directory, 208-235 > 
under the Consulate, 236—250; 
England recognizes French, 240; 
and the Catholic religion, 246; 
Second, in France, 390, 407-415; 
Third, in France proclaimed, 453 ; 
France under the Third, 483-507 ; 
the religious orders and, 499-500; 
in Spain, 605-606 ; in Portugal, 608. 

Republican Party, in France, created, 
154; and Louis Philippe, 384-386, 
389-390; in Germany, 404—405; 
Lamartine and, 407 ; Napoleon III 
and, 416, 450; after 1870, 489; in 
Spain, 605 ; in Portugal, 608. 

Residents, English, in India, 565. 

Responsibility for the War, 778, 804. 

Restoration, in England, 25-26. 

Reunion, 503. 

Renter, Admiral von, 764. 

Revolution, Puritan (English), 3-4, 
11-16; of 1688, 25-26, 52; Amer- 
ican, 55-56, 566; Spanish (1820), 
324-325, 327; in Naples (1820), 
327; Industrial, 331-338; Turkish 
(1908), 625-627, 664-665, 677; 
Russian, 727-732. See also French 
Revolution. 

Revolutionary Tribunal, created, 181, 
184; work of, 185-186, 188-190; 
Robespierre and, 198-201. 



Rheims, cathedral of, 736 ; freed, 749. 

Rhine Province, 762-763. 

Richelieu, 503. 

Rhodes, Italy seizes, 671. 

Rhodes, Cecil, 578. 

Rhodesia, 578, 581. 

Riga, and the line of battle, 702 ; the 
Germans take, 730. 

" Right of intervention," 327-328, 375. 

Rights of Man, Declaration of, 140- 
142, 147, 164, 168, 188, 242. 

Rio de Oro, 607. 

Rio Muni, 607. 

Risorgimento, 419. 

Rivoli, 218. 

Roberts, Lord, 580. 

Robespierre, a monarchist, 154; and 
the Jacobins, 161 ; opposes war, 
167; overthrow of, 172; and the 
republic, 175; leader of the Jaco- 
bins, 176, 181; demands execution 
of Louis XVI, 178-179; and the 
Committee of Public Safety, 185- 
186; and Danton, 194-197; dic- 
tator, 196-201 ; fall of, 201-202. 

Rodjestvensky, Admiral, 651 

Roland, Madame, 166, 190. 

Romagna, revolt in, 429. 

Romanoff, House of, 70. Sec also 
Russia. 

Rome, 223; Napoleon and, 286, 290; 
republic of, 400-401 ; Garibaldi and, 
430, 432 ; becomes the capital of the 
Kingdom of Italy, 457, 508-509. 

Romilly, on Venice, 312. 

Roosevelt, President, 652, 663; Ex- 
President, 717. 

Rossbach, battle of, 66. 

"Rotten House of Commons, The," 
by Lovett, 356. 

Roubaix, 751. 

Roumania, kingdom of, 523, 615-616, 
623 ; and the Treaty of San Stefano, 
617; independent of Turkey, 619- 
620, 623; after 1878, 623; enters 
war against Bulgaria, 675-677 ; and 
the World War, 712-713; and 
peace, 739-741, 754; Germany to 
evacuate, 762 ; and the Peace Con- 
ference, 776-778. 

Roumanians, in eastern Hungary, 
319, 397-398, 523-524, 712; Tur- 
key and, 610. 

Roumelia, 617 ; Eastern, 619. 



(poy^ 



/>vU- 



INDEX 



851 



in Paris, 484; in Austria, 522; in 
Portugal, 608; in Russia, 728-732, 
766; in Germany, 757, 765-767. 
oissons, 743. 

olferino, battle of, 427, 515. •* 
olovief, 636. 
omaliland, 511. 

omme. Battle of the, 710-712, 732. 
)onnino, 778. 

Jophia, Regent of Russia, 71. 
oudan, recovered, 549 ; England and, 
581, 590-591. 

50uth Africa, slaverj^ in, 353 ; Boer 
War in, 549-55°, 552, 569, 579-580; 
British, 575-581 ; and the World 
War, 582, 698, 706 ; and the Peace 
Conference, 776. 

50uth African Republic, 575-580. 

south African Union, 580-581. 

South America, Garibaldi and, 430- 
431; French Guiana in, 503; 
Italians emigrate to, 513; England 
acquires Dutch possessions in, 575 ; 
revolts in, 607. 

South Australia, 571. 

Soviets, rise of, 728-730; in German}', 
757, 766. 

Spain, England and, 24, 47, 53, 240 
and the Thirty Years' War, 27 
Louis XIV and, 30-32, 47-48 
enters war against France, 179, 205 
makes peace with France, 208 
Napoleon and, 276-281, 288, 607 
Metternich and, 324-325; and the 
revolution of 1820, 324-325, 329; 
and JMexico, 447 ; Queen Isabella 
driven out of, 451; Germany pur- 
chases islands from, 469 ; and 
Africa, 583; since 1815, 604-607; 
a Republic, 605-606. 

Spanish-American War, 607. 

Spanish Netherlands, Louis XIV and, 
30732. 

Spanish Succession, War of, 47-48. 

Spartacides, 766-767. 

Speke, 584. 

Stambuloff, 621-622. 

Standard (London), 345. 

Stanley, and the first Reform Bill, 347. 

Stanley, Henry M., 584-586. 

State Socialism, in the German Em- 
pire, 466-467. 

States of the Church. Sec Papal 
Stales. 



States-General, Dutch, 31 ; in France, 

120-129, 140- 
Steam, engine, 331-336; navigation, 

335 ; railroad, 336. 
Stein, Baron von, 288-289. 
Stephenson, George, and the Rocket, 

336._ 
Storthing (Norway), 600-604. 
Strafford, and Charles I, 7 ; executed, 

10. 
Strasburg, 34; archbishop of, 96; 

Louis Napoleon at, 412; surrenders 

to the Germans, 455 ; French enter, 

763- 

Stuart, House of, advent of, 3 ; fol- 
lowed by House of Hanover, 5 1 . 

Stumm, Baron von, 477. 

Stiirmer, 728. 

Suez Canal, Disraeli and, 537, 588- 
589 ; threatened, 697. 

Suffrage, universal in France, 183, 
202, 238; in Great Britain (1815), 
340-343 ; Cobbett advocates, 345 ; 
the Reform Bill of 1832 and, 352; 
extension of, in England, 362—364; 
France (1814), 366; extended in 
France, 384 ; in Germany, 401, 406 ; 
universal in France, 409, 411-412, 
415 ; in the new German Empire, 
459 ; Socialists demand universal, 
in Germany, 464 ; in Prussia, 475- 
479; in Italy, 510-511; universal 
in Austria, 522; extension of (Eng- 
land), 540-541 ; in New Zealand, 
574; in Sweden, 604; in Norway, 
604; in Spain, 604-605, 607; in 
Roumania, 623 ; in Greece, 624-625 ; 
in Poland, 629 ; in Japan, 647 ; in 
Russia, 657-658; in Germany, 758. 

Sun Yat Sen, President, 653. 

Sussex, 723. 

Suvla Bay, 703. 

Sweden, and the Triple Alliance, 31 ; 
in the Seven Years' War, 66; and 
Russia, 72, 74, 77, 269, 292, 311; 
and England, 275 ; and Pomerania, 
311; and Norway, 312, 598, 600- 
603 ; Norway separates from, 603- 
604 ; loses Finland, 628. 

Swiss Guard, 130, 171. 

Switzerland, a republic, 49, 78; in- 
creased, 312; and the July revolu- 
tion, 375 ; Louis Philippe and, 382 ; 
a neutralized state, 593, 687 ; gov- 



852 



INDEX 



ernment of, S95-598; and Greece, 

612. 
Sydney, 570. 
Syria, invaded, 229 ; Turkey and, 696 ; 

the French and, 753; problem of, 

770. 

Taaffe ministry, 521-522. 

Taft, ex-President, 774. 

Tagliamento, retreat to the, 735. 

Talleyrand, 263 ; and the Congress of 
Vienna, 308. 

Tannenberg, battle of, 695, 700. 

Tariff, boundaries, 91 ; Napoleon 
established high protective, 257; 
boundaries in Spain, 282 ; on bread- 
stuffs in England, 344, removed, 
360 ; Huskisson and, 346 ; Peel and, 
360 ; Germany abandons low, 467 ; 
Chamberlain and the reform of, 
551 ; Canada and, 569. 

Tarnopol, captured, 695. 

Tasman, and New Zealand, 570. 

Tasmania, 571. 

Taxation, in France under the Old 
Regime, 92-102 ; Turgot and, 102 
States-General should vote, 123 
Bonaparte improves system of, 248 
under Napoleon, 301 ; Austrian 
nobles and, 318 ; Hungarian nobility 
exempt from, 393 ; and the Educa- 
tion Act of 1902 (England), 550 ; and 
the budget of 1909 (England), 553- 
554; New Zealand and, 574; in 
Portugal, 608 ; in Russia, 629 ; new, 
in Germany, 679. 

Telegraph (London), William II and, 
478. 

Tennis Court Oath, 127. 

"Terrible Year," 483. 

Terror. Sec Reign of Terror and 
"Great Terror." 

"Terrorists," in Russia, 636-637. 

Test Act, 25. 

Tewfik, 589. 

Thessaly, and Greece, 624-625. 

Thiers, declares a "vacancy of power," 
453 ; Chief of the Executive Power, 
483 ; government of, 485-487. 

Third Estate (France), under the Old 
Regime, 95, 100-105, 121-123; de- 
clares itself the National Assembly, 
126; and the royal session, 127. 

Third Section (Russia), 637. 



Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), 27. 
Thousand, expedition of the, 432. 
Tilsit, Peace of, 269, 271, 275, 281 

291 ; revoliition in, 757. 
Times, London, and Dreyfus, 497. 
Tithes, under the Old Regime, 95 

102; relincjuished, 132, 134, 241 

abolished in South Germany, 265 

in Ireland, 532. 
Tobago, 564. 
Todleben, 614. 
Togo, Admiral, 652. 
Togoland, Germany and, 469, 706. 
Tonkin, France and, 492, 505. 
Torchy, 744. 
Tories, and the Stuarts, 52 ; anc 

George III, 54-55; in 1815, 340 

345 ; reforms of, 346-347. 
Toul, 707. 
Toulon, suspects in, 189, recovered 

204, 211; Bonaparte and, 226. 
Toulouse, 499. 
Tours, government at, 454. 
Townshend, General, 737. 
Trades Unions, France and, 492. 
Trafalgar, battle of, 272—273. 
Trans-Saharan railroad contemplated 

SOS- 
Trans-Siberian railroad, 638, 649 

651. 
Transvaal, 575-580. 
Transylvania, 519, 523-524, 712-713 
Treitschke, 480. 
Trent, 514. 

Trentino, 514, 706, 755. 
Tribunate, 238. 
Tricolor, adopted, 130; stamped upon 

136; the "patriots" and, 163; ban 

ished, 300; returns, 302; welcomec 

in Lorraine, 763. 
Trieste, Austria and, 260, 755 ; Franc< 

gains, 284; Italy desires, 514, 706. 
Trinidad, England and, 240, 564. 
Triple Alliance, 469-471, 4^5, 511 

514, 666-667, 669, 683, 685, 705. 
Triple Entente, 686. 
TripoH, 503, 506, 513; Turkey and 

583; Italy and, 670-671; port of 

taken, 753. 
Trochu, General, 453. 
Troppau, Congress of, 328. 
Trotzky, 730, 739-74°- 
Tsushima, Straits of, battle of, 652. 
Tuileries, 138, 152, 168, 177, 179, 185 



INDEX 



853 



198, 204. 211; attacked, 169-171; 
surrounded, 182; Napoleon returns 
to, 301-302 ; Napoleon III and, 416. 

Tunis, France and, 471, 492, 503- 
505, 511, 585, 670; Turkey and, 
583 ; Italy and, 670. 

Turcoing, 751. 

Turenne, 30. 

Turgot, on taxation, 102 ; Louis X\T 
and, 115, 117-118; Napoleon and, 
210. 

Turin, 215, 326; parliament in, 429, 
433 ; capital of Italy, 508. 

Turkey, in the eighteenth century, 
49; and Russia, 72, 77, 269, 292, 
311, 610, 613, 617; and Egypt, 226, 
228 ; Sultan of, declares war against 
Napoleon, 229; Russia wages war 
against, 470; Italy and, 513; the 
future of European, 526 ; and Africa, 
583, 588; and Austria, 610; and 
Serbia, 611, 623: and Greece, 611- 
613, 625; Russia and the Greek 
Christians of, 614-615; admitted 
to the European family of states, 
615; and Roumania, 615—616; and 
the revolts in the Balkans, 615-619 ; 
and the Congress of Berlin, 619- 
620; and Bulgaria, 620-622; and 
Roumania, 623 ; Revolution in 
(1908), 625-627, 664; Nicholas I 
and, 630-631 ; collapse of, 664-677 ; 
and the war with Italy, 670-671; 
and the Balkan wars, 677; and 
the World War, 696-697, 737, 
753-754; and Brest-Litovsk, 740; 
granted an armistice, 755; Ger- 
many to evacuate, 762. 

Turco-Italian War (191 1), 670-671. 

Tuscany, Austria and, 312, 325-326; 
aids revolt against Austria, 395 ; 
ruler of, deserts the cause, 396, 400; 
ruler of, should be restored, 428 ; 
revolution in, 429. 

Udine, 735. 

Uitlanders, 577-578. 

Ukraine, declares its independence, 

732; and the peace, 739-740. 
Ulm, 258-259, 271. 
Ulster, and Home Rule, 559-561. 
Ultimatum, Austrian, to Serbia, 681- 

684, 688; Germany's to Belgium, 

687-688. 



Ultras (France), 368. 

Umbria, Victor Emmanuel II and, 

432-433- 

Uniformity, Act of, 25. 

Union, Act of (England and Ireland), 
movement to repeal, 531. 

Unionist Coalition, 545. 

Unionists, policy of, 545 ; in power, 
548, 552; and the taritif, 551. 

United States, Constitution of, com- 
pared with French Constitution of 
1 79 1, 144; and the Monroe Doc- 
trine, 329-330; Louis Philippe and, 
3S2 ; Louis Napoleon and, 412 ; and 
Mexico, 448-449 ; Senate of, and 
Bundesrath, 458; and protection, 
467; emigration to, 469, 513, 532, 
637; and the Alabama award, 535; 
and the Oregon dispute, 569; ancl 
the Congo, 586; recognizes Re- 
public of Spain, 605 ; and Cuba, 
607; and Greece, 612; and China, 
644, 649 ; and Japan, 645-646 ; and 
the Hague Conference, 661 ; main- 
tains neutrality, 698 ; and the 
World War, 717-727, 744-752, 755; 
and the Armistice, 761-762; and 
the League of Nations, 774; and 
the Peace Conference, 776-779, 
809-811. 

Unredeemed Ital}-, 514, 706. 

Urgel, Spanish Bishop of, 593. 

Uruguay, 776. 

Utrecht, captured, 31. 

Valenfay, 278. 

Valenciennes, 751. 

Valmy, Prussians checked at, 174, 

382. 
Vane, Sir Henry, and Cromwell, 22. 
Varennes, flight to, 152-154, 157, 158, 

161, 162-. 
Vatican Council, proclaims dogma of 

papal infallibility, 462. 
Vauban, 28-30. 
Vaux, 708. 
Vendee, civil war in, 150, 157, 179, 

182, 189, 231. 
Vendemiaire, the thirteenth of, 204- 

205, 21 u 
Venetia, Napoleon and, 221, 260; 

Austria acquires, 312; revolts, 395; 

Piedmont and, 427, 429; ceded to 

Italy, 443, 508. 



854 



INDEX 



Venice, a republic, 49, 57, 78; young 
Russians sent to, 72; Republic of, 
overthrown, 219, 223, 401 ; given to 
Austria, 221, 312, 325-326; bronze 
horses of, 223, 312; restores re- 
public in, 395. 

Venizelos, 705, 778. 

Verdun, besieged, 172; threatened, 
692; attacked 707-710; freed, 749. 

Vergniaud, 165. 

Verona, Congress of, 329; threatened, 
711. 

Versailles, Louis XIV and, 40-44 ; 
royal residence, 87, 89, 96, 98 ; 
States-General meets in, 120, 128, 
140; tricolor insulted, 135; women 
march to, 136; William I (Prussia) 
proclaimed German Emperor in, 
45 7 ; Assem-bly removed to, 484 ; 
seat of government transferred 
from, 491 ; armistice terms at, 756; 
Treaty of, 781-809. 

Vesle, Germans at the, 747. 

Vicenza, threatened, 711. 

Victor Emanuel I abdicates, 328. 

Victor Emmanuel II (Piedmont), ac- 
cession of, 400, 423 ; and the making 
of the Kingdom of Italy, 423-434; 
and Rome, 456-457 ; death of, 509. 

Victor Emmanuel III (Italy), 512. 

Victoria, colony of, 571 ; legislation of, 

574-. 

Victoria, Queen, accession of, 355- 
356 ; becomes Empress of India, 
537-538, 565 ; her diamond jubilee, 
548-549 ; death of, 549-550. 

Vienna, 117, Napoleon and, 259, 283; 
Peace of, 284; Congress of, 300- 
301, 308-314; the center of Euro- 
pean affairs, 320-321 ; Poles in, 381 ; 
the storm center in 1848, 392; riot 
in, 394 ; Prussian army and, 443 ; 
capital of Austria, 518; revolution 

.in, 755- 
Vilagos, 399. 

Villafranca, preliminaries of, 427-428. 
Vimy Ridge, 735. 
Vladivostok, founded, 643; fleet at, 

651. 
Volney, 245. 
Voltaire, on the death of Charles I, 

16 ; and Catherine the Great, 76 ; 

on the laws of France, 91 ; influence 

of, loi, 103, 106, 108-110, 210; and 



the Church, 103, 109; imprisoned, 
130. 

Wagram, battle of, 283-284. 

Waldeck, 478. 

Waldeck- Rousseau, 499-500. 

Wales, representation of, in the Eng- 
lish Parliament, 340 ; and old age 
pensions, 552; Anglican Church in, 
disestablished, 561. 

Wallachia, practically independent, 
613; independent, 615. See Rou- 
mania. 

Warsaw, Napoleon and, 268 ; Grand 
Duchy of, 271, 284, 286, 292, 296, 
310-311, 629, 769-770; fall of, 381 ; 
captured, 702. 

Wartburg, Festival, 322-323, 283. 

Waterloo, 56, 225, 303-305, 3i7- 

Watt, James, and the steam engine, 

352-333- 

Weimar, Duke of, 323; Constituent 
Assembly in, 767. 

Wellesley, Sir Arthur (later Duke of 
Wellington) and the war in Spain, 
280-281 ; methods of, 293 ; invades 
France, 297; and Waterloo, 303- 
305 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 
308 ; forced to resign, 347 ; unable 
to form a ministry, 351; and the 
Chartist agitation, 358. 

Wellington, Duke of. 5ec Wellesley. 

Wellington, New Zealand, 573. 

West Indies, slavery in the English 
colonies of, 353 ; French possessions 
in, 502 ; English possessions in, 563. 

Western Australia, 571. 

Westminster, Hall, 11, 25 ; Abbey, 24, 

548, 585. 

Westphalia, Treaty of, 27, 34, 160; 
Kingdom of, 270-271, 286. 

Wet, Christian de, 580. 

WethereU, 350. 

W^eyler, 607. 

Whigs, in power, 52, 347 ; supported 
by the Tories, 54; in America, 55; 
reforms of, 347-355- 

White, Henry, 778. 

Whitehall, palace of, 16, 22, 25. 

Wieland, 281, 767. 

Wilberforce, 353. 

William I (Prussia), deadlock be- 
tween, and ParUament, 435-437 5 
and the battle of Sadowa, 443 ; and 



INDEX 



855 



the Hohenzollem candidacy, 452; 
proclaimed German Emperor, 457; 
death of, 471. 

WilHam II (German Emperor), char- 
acter of, 460; reign of, 471-481; 
and China, 648-649 ; and Kiauchau, 
697 ; and the German drive of 19 18, 
741; abdicates, 758-759; Bismarck 
and, 761 ; and the German navy, 
763 ; to be tried. 804. 

William IV (England), reign of, 347- 

355- 
William of Orange, becomes King of 

England, 25-26, 37, 50; opposes 

Louis XIV, 32. 
William of Wied (Albania), 677. 
Wilson, President, and the World 

War, 719-725; and peace, 756; and 

the League of Nations, 774, 779; 

and the Peace Conference, 776-778. 
Windischgratz, 396. 
Windsor, House of, 50. 
Wissembourg, 763. 
Witte, Sergius, 638. 
Wolfe, defeats Montcalm, 53. 
Wood, General Leonard, 717. 



Worcester, battle of, 19, 24 

World problems, 770-772. 

World War, 679-759. 

Worms, Emigres in, 165. 

Worship of Reason, 193-195, 198. 

Wurmser, 217. 

Wtirtemberg, 59 ; becomes a kingdom, 
264 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 
308; aids Austria against Prussia, 
441 ; joins Prussia against France, 
453 ; in the Bundesrath, 459. 

Wytschaete ridge, 743. 

Yokohama, 646. 

Young Ireland, 531. 

Young Italy, Mazzini and, 419-421. 

Young Turks, 625-626, 664, 667-670. 

Ypres, Second Battle of, 699 ; freed, 

74Q- 
Yuan Shih K'ai, President, 653-654. 

Zeebrugge, 751. 

Zimmermann, and Ambassador Ge- 

rard_, 723-725. 
Zola, Emile, and Dreyfus, 496, 498. 
Zurich, 597. 



^./I, ^^" 






Uf 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




009 528 383 4 









p:;:;::fi,^:OT* 









lM0iS 



